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

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.

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.

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.

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.

In a conversation with a Cartridge Rebuild Service, it was intimated that the Bulk of the Body albeit it Stream Lined/Reduced or Voluminous and with Bulk will effect the presentation of the Cartridge.
Also the Cantilever Length was made known to have an impact on the presentation.
These are the wonderful experiments only a few get to compare, and the choices of ownership are a result of the choices of the Design Teams.

Following the Wonderful Work of a Design Team, mere mortals as myself have the pleasure of interfering with the the VTA , Azimuth and Stylus Rake.
That not half as much fun, I like to discuss with a Builder there thoughts on methods to use on a Cartridge and make a 'Road Not Too Travelled' decision.

I am at present enforced to look for a Service to work on my Cadenza Black.     

So the MC3000 MK II arrived earlier this week, and I had a chance to install it last night and fine tune the alignment this morning. I have old eyes, and I find that natural light coming through the window is the morning is great for aligning cartridges. 

The first thing I did was inspect the cantilever, and it does appear to be an OEM one that is straight and has no issues, with only a diamond replacement done. The body itself is in nice condition, with no signs of abuse, I did get a stylus guard but no other packaging, but since this is going to be a daily driver cartridge I can live without those other pieces. 

I will say I am very pleased with this cartridge. It is well balanced in terms of tone, excellent detail, dynamically expressive, and easy to listen to. I cannot think of anything I would fault it for. The lower output voltage is not an issue for me as the Ortofon E-03 phono stage has plenty of gain and a low noise floor. Just a lovely performing cartridge all around, and it certainly supports the argument that high performance analog playback for cartridges was achieved awhile ago. The original MC3000 was released in 1988, I am not sure when the MK II was produced. 

I think I will now keep an eye out for a MC7500. But I am going to enjoy using this cartridge as a daily driver. Whenever the time comes it will get a new diamond as the aluminum cantilever is in perfect shape. What would really be fun is to find one with a damaged or replaced cantilever and fit it with a boron replacement and see what the differences are. I guess simple things would keep me entertained. 

Dear @neonknight  : Good that you like it. The MC3000 was not really up to the task after been a MC2000 owner but the MK2 that you own is really good.
Take care with the fragility of the cartridge body.

R.

@rauliruegas

I was unaware that the Ortofon bodies were fragile in any way. They look to be a high temperature fired ceramic body from what I can tell. Are the tabs for holding the bolts and nuts known for fracturing? I don't wrench my bolts down super tight, I just snug them up till they are firm, but never over torqued. 

This cartridge was not purchased to be one of my best cartridges, but rather a daily driver that I can put hours on when listening to records in a more casual setting. So i can burn up the diamond and not worry about having to send it off for a new stone. The problem with having my other cartridges is that a level of performance is set, and a cartridge like the Audio Technica OC9 II or III is not going to satisfy. The cartridge I am going to want to listen to needs to be a quality unit, but one that can still be had at a reasonable price. These X000 series of cartridges really do not command a price tag on par with their level of performance. Of course the caveat is can your analog system effectively deal with the low output voltages. My phono stage has no issue running a MC3000 MK II, so its a solid choice for what I need. For fun, I will keep an eye out for a MC7500 also. My Transfiguration, Ikeda, and ZYX are long term keepers. But for the fun of it I would like to own the 7500 and perhaps one of the classic stone body Kiseki cartridges. 

@neonknight a word of caution about that ’for the fun of it’ attitude, as this has a tendency to get out of control. I’ve got over 40 now and have been telling myself at least 20 times this will be the final one. Of course it’s ridiculous, as my wife keeps reminding me. In my defense I try to point out that a cartridge collection is perhaps not more silly than having a shoe collection. Luckily she can take a joke. 

Raul is right about the ’ceramic’ body of the Ortofon. On my MC5000 one of those protruberances on the side has broken off like a piece of porcelain. The cartridge came to me that way, so I don't know how much force had caused it, but it's fragile. It's one of the reasons I got it very cheap, the other having been retipped with Namiki sapphire cantilever. I still use it as my 'go too' cartridge, but I bought it just to find out if these '000' models were really that good and if my system could handle the low output. The answer to both questions was 'yes', which started the search for MC2000 and MC7500. So have fun!

I was unaware that the Ortofon bodies were fragile in any way.

@neonknight   it is sintered aluminum, it is very hard but also fragile especially if you tighten the screws very hard.
The 3000Mk2 version entered the market in 1990 and has been in production for over 11 years.

Glad you dig vintage cartridges (even if yours is re-tipped) for everyday use. I hope you can find a NOS samples of what you’re looking for. People who are into sound are well aware how good those high-end carts from the ’80s and ’90s really are (straight from the box).

@best-groove

That is interesting, and to be honest its difficult to find out what the body is made out of. Ortofon just calls it black sapphire. However I did locate this bit of info regarding developed by an Ortofon dealer in Australia I believe.

"MC 5000

The black ceramic body, sintered at approximately 1,200 degrees Celsius, is a rigid structure that eliminates resonances in the audible range.

Mounted on a sapphire cantilever, Ortofon’s Nude Replicant diamond is cut to match the sapphire which cut the record groove as closely as possible.

MC 5000 is a highly accurate, analytical and neutral transducer.

All available information is retrieved from the grooves and music is crisply reproduced with palpable presence that converts your living room into a concert hall.

A reference-grade audio system is required to reveal these qualities.

Because output is relatively low, a high-performance MC transformer or MC preamplifier should be used. Recommended load: 20 – 100 Ohms.


MC 3000 Mk II

Housed in the same body as MC 5000, this cartridge also employs the same Nude Replicant diamond, but mounted on a conical aluminium cantilever.

MC 3000 Mk II has a strong sonic resemblance to MC 5000, with a milder, gentler, more laid-back style, while maintaining the integrity, power and authority of complex orchestral works.

The listening room is experienced as an integrated part of the concert hall.

As with MC 5000, the low output requires a high-performance MC transformer or MC preamplifier with a recommended load of approximately 50 Ohms. The actual load, is, as always, a question of personal preference. A lower value will allow the sonic image to snap into sharper focus, while a higher value will have the opposite effect."

If the body were aluminum I don't think anyone could tighten a head shell bolt that tight to break those mounting tabs as they are quite thick. 

@edgewear  

Oh I think I crossed that bridge awhile ago. I only use one audio system and have taken over the living room as my audio room. My patient wife is fine with this, but if I were to try to install another audio system in a different room I suspect she would bury my body in a shallow grave in the back yard. 

My primary table is a SOTA Cosmos Eclipse with SME V and Transfiguration Audio Proteus. For a person of modest means as myself this should be an end game table. I then came across a Well Tempered Reference with an Ikeda 9 Kawami cartridge on our local Craigs List for a great price so I scooped it up. The Ikeda is not well suited for this arm so I installed a ZYX 4D that I have on it. I then came across a Dynavector DV505 arm on Canuckmart and had to have it. I have a cartridge and arm now, but no table for it. I fixed that by buying a Scheu Audio Das Lauftwerk No 2 from a dealer here on Audiogon. So what is an extra cartridge or two when you own more tables than makes any kind of sense? LOL!

I have a few cartridges I am interested in, perhaps one of the classic stone body Kiseki, the MC7500, one of the Shinon, and maybe a Gold Bug. Thats the list for now, although I have seen an Audio Tekne that peaks my interest too. 

If the body were aluminum I don’t think anyone could tighten a head shell bolt that tight to break those mounting tabs as they are quite thick.

I have some reviews and tests in the magazines of the time and they claimed that this "sintered aluminum" hard as ceramic but it does not have a ceramic body because otherwise it would have cost a lot more..
If you want I can also show you the owner's manual where it is written what the body is made of ... I am a reliable person and I do not like to write saloon talk.

@best-groove  

Oh that would be very cool indeed! In my searching I never found a reference to sintered aluminum for this cartridge, the best I could do is what Ortofon called black sapphire. The searches for information regarding the Ortofon X000 series cartridges always brought up a legacy page that showed all the Ortofon cartridges but none ever talked about body material. 

https://www.ortofon.com/ortofon-%C2%B4000-series-p-690

If you have any more in depth info you could share regarding the MC 3000 MK II I would love the be able to read it. Please don't read this as me doubting you, I just would like to acquaint myself with all the facts and info I can find on the cartridge as I do enjoy it.  I can see myself acquiring a 7500 also, although the MC2000 is getting rare enough, and the cantilever fragile enough that it might be tough to find a good specimen. 

Oh that would be very cool indeed!

Well, now I'm at work but give me a few hours and when I get home I take a picture and put it in view.

@neonknight the manual of MC5000 says it uses the unique aluminium oxide housing material originally introduced in MC3000. It continues: "Aluminium oxide can be formed into a ceramic substance by sintering at a temperature of 1600 Celsius to become as hard as porcelain. The articularly hard properties of the material may be better understood when you consider that on the Moh scale, diamond has a hardness factor of 10. On the same scale, aluminium oxide, ruby and sapphire have a hardness factor of almost 9". The idea is that any resonances appear at frequencies far above the audible range.

@edgewear   

Ah very enlightening! I wonder what they mean by "ceramic substance" and perhaps that phrase has given rise to the thought it was a ceramic body. I wonder if there are really any practical and real world improvements to the SLM technique that Ortofon is using on their current top tier cartridges. The MC7500 shows that body built from titanium also. If so, I wonder if a system at my level of quality is able to fully portray those improvements. 

Funny how these things occur. I recently saw a MC5000 from a UK dealer who obtained it from Ortofon Treasure Trove, and has 50 hours. I am seriously thinking about inquiring and see if they will sell to a buyer in the US. In the past I have had the Cadenza Blue, and appreciated that cartridge along with other cartridges that have sported gemstone cantilevers. The 5000 is fitted with sapphire as I read it, but otherwise is the same as the 3000 MK II. 

Worth considering...

From what I read somewhere the MC3000 MK II uses the same body as the original MC300, so I went back to that review to gather some construction info. That info tracks what the owners manual says.

"The magnet material was changed to a more powerful material called neodymium (it used to be an alloy of samarium and cobalt) and moved closer to the coils, which doubled the cartridge's output. And because the stronger magnetic field might have an adverse effect on motions of the original aluminum armature (footnote 1), the 3000's armature is made of carbon fiber. Even the outer casing material was changed, from aluminum to aluminum oxide. This sintered (fired) ceramic compound has a hardness of 9 Mohs, 1 unit below that of a diamond's 10. The harder a material, the higher its natural resonating frequency; the new case is an attempt to get this out beyond the audible range without having to resort to a diamond case."


So aluminum oxide is really hard stuff. They also make cantilevers out of it also as I recall. Very interesting stuff, thanks so much for sharing your knowledge. 

Dear @neonknight  : Thank's to your thread yesterday I was looking for Ortofon 000 manuals or something that can help on information and I found out one box of 2000 and one big box of the 5000 and this one with only the Ortofon usual VTF tool and that finding makes me to remember this:

due that no Ortofon distributor in my country they decided to sale for me directly and that's what I did it with my MC 2000's and latter on I look for the MC 3000 and bougth it from Ortofon.

Been accustomed to the 2000 the 3000 disapointed a little and when I changed ( time latter. ) from a headshell by accident I put so many torque in the crews that that ceramic just broken. Ortofon was so kidness that with out charge other than both ways shipping offered to me the MC5000 that latter on I sold and I can't remember why I still have the original double box.

Now, the 5000 was a good performer but I prefered the 2000, specially the one with boron cantilever.

After that I bougth a second hand ( low hours ) 3000 MK2 that I like it more.

There is no doubt that the 3000/5000 where builded with ceramic not what the Ortofon link said it.

Here two links that talks what is that ceramic:

https://www.stereophile.com/phonocartridges/188ortofon/index.html

http://korfaudio.com/hs-a01

Btw, I owned SAEC and Victor/JVC ceramic headshells: SAEC white color and JVC in near black.

Look for the 7500 and not so much for the 5000. Only an opinion.

R.

@neonknight     here it is, it should be enough.

https://i.postimg.cc/HkFZ5X7D/1.png

@best-groove

Ah thank you so much. Yes it certainly is informative reading, and provides a good deal of insight. It is my thought that Ortofon always seems to make level headed design choices that are aimed at the performance of the cartridge rather than the mystique and aesthetics of it. As I go through various albums I have to wonder about later generation Ortofon cartridges. I have owned an A90, and to be honest I am not sure I would choose it over this cartridge. If anything, the MC3000 II seems a bit more balanced and even keeled in terms of tonal balance and its ability to express fine detail. I do have my eyes peeled for a MC7500, I will obtain one some day. 

Do you know what kind of alloy they are using for the cantilever? It has a matt finish and even a touch of grey to its color. I also understand it is tapered, and I wonder what they have done to this cantilever to improve its performance over a standard aluminum one. Unfortunately no reviews I have found address this, and Ortofon only refers to the cantilever as aluminum. It would be good to know any more info about this, if its out there. 

Once again, thanks so much for making the effort and taking the time to create that post. It is greatly appreciated. 

Do you know what kind of alloy they are using for the cantilever?

No the user manual does not explain it or at least I was unable to identify the composition; explains the body, the stylus, the suspension, other details but not the details of the cantilever.
I will try to browse the magazines of the time with the review.

How would the Ortofon Jubilee compare with these older cartridges? The Jubilee was at the top of Ortofon's range in its time.
I have just bought a "new" Jubilee from Ortofon's Treasure Trove and have been very impressed with it. I like it better than my Windfeld Ti and Cadenza Black.

It’s always a subjective judgment to say who got enough credit for what, but if I recall the original Gordon Holt review of the MC2000 and the T2000, in Stereophile, he was blown away, despite his misgivings about its high compliance and very low output. And back then Holt was “the man” so far as high end audio reviews were concerned, at least as influential as MF is today. I believe he put the MC2000 at the top of the heap. Of course, HP shared the top status with JGH. I don’t recall reading his review.

In terms of advanced technology, the Jubilee was the next generation.
New Body Shape, WRD was possibly with changed materials to suit the new cantilever,  Silver Wire on the Coils, Boron Cantilever with Shibata Stylus.
The Kontrapunkt Range was most likely produced using loaned technologies from this design, but veered in the design with the use of the Cantilever and Stylus assemblies.
This range never received the WRD Technology, but was produced with the early versions of the FSE Technology. 
Literature uses references to the Jubilee as comparisons in the delivery.

The Ortofon Vienna was an added design to fit in with a certain market demand, it also has the Jubilee Technology on board with a changed WRD to produce more Bass and the FSE was incorporated.
It was almost the base model for the Windfeld to be built from.  

The Windfeld was the next generation in advancement to the Jubilee and Kontrapunkt Range.
The Cadenza Range was produced loaning the updates in Technologies used on the Windfeld. 

The Ortofon 0000's Range used early WRD Technology, Copper Wire for the Coils, Aluminium Cantilevers and Replicant and FG Stylus.
There was a noticeable mass to the bodies.
I would feel there would be a noticeable richness to the presentation of this type of design.    

Dear @rossb  : I owned too the Jubilee and been a very good quality performer its overall " presentation " is different from the Windfeld model  due that are way different kind of overall designs.

As with any cartridge it's not easy to compare to other cartridges because we can't be totally sure that this or that cartridge mates the better with the tonearm. We could have a good idea of their performance levels and from thoser kind of comparisons we have to be sure that the alignment and overall set up of each cartridge is accurated for both samples and that the SPL for the comparison sessions be the same.

Good that you own all those Ortofon cartridges. Enjoy it.

R.

From reading Neonknight’s quote from the Ortofon website, I have a hunch what they are saying is that when you heat Aluminum Oxide to 1600 degrees C, it will form a ceramic-like substance, but being an oxide of aluminum, I am not sure it meets the formal definition of a "ceramic", as summarized in Wiki and elsewhere: "Ceramic material is an inorganic, non-metallic, often crystalline oxide, nitride, or carbide material. Some elements, such as carbon or silicon, may be considered ceramics. Ceramic materials are brittle, hard, strong in compression, and weak in shearing and tension."
So, since the body is an oxide of Aluminum, which is a metal, the body of the Ortofon cartridges does not meet this formal definition. Other sources give essentially the same definition, including the "non-metallic" qualifier.

From Wiki too:

"""  Known as alpha alumina in materials science communities or alundum (in fused form) or aloxite[20] in the mining and ceramic communities aluminium oxide finds wide use. Annual world production of aluminium oxide in 2015 was approximately 115 million tonnes, over 90% of which is used in the manufacture of aluminium metal.[7] The major uses of speciality aluminium oxides are in refractories, ceramics, polishing and abrasive applications.

Most ceramic eyes on fishing rods are circular rings made from aluminium oxide...""

No one talk of that formal ceramic definition. 

R.

No one talk of that formal ceramic definition.

Actually transition metal oxides such as aluminium oxide are referred to in materials engineering as ceramic.

@lewm 

Ceramic material is an inorganic, non-metallic, often crystalline oxide, nitride, or carbide material. 

Your quote from  Wiki is self explanatory - what do you think "carbide" is. 

Dover, I think a carbide can be made by combining aluminum oxide with carbon at high heat. That’s what I think, having looked it up just like you probably did. I also think that there was no mention of carbon being used in the manufacture of the ortofon cartridge bodies. Ergo they can’t be carbides based on the information previously divulged. Or a nitride or a nonmetallic oxide. If you and Raul believe that an aluminum oxide by itself can qualify as a ceramic after appropriate processing, ok.

The ''body'' versus the ''naked'' preference enigma. There is no
logic by preferences becuse those are ''subjective'' by ''nature''.
But even so contradictory satements should cause at least
some uneasy feeling. Why should cart desigener like Car,
Dertonarm, Ortofon , etc., etc. make so mach efforts with
even ''exotic materials'' to build ''resonance free'' bodies while
naked are not only much more easy to produce but also
much cheaper?  Doing whatever without any reason can
only (?) be explained by ''passion''. For example Rauls
passion to imrove things like many speaker owners who try
to improvw their speaker by more expensive wire. Removing
Faraday cage from Allaerts MC 2 or any other version
imply to know better than the designer himslef. But that is
how ambitious amateurs  think. 

When reading the latest reveals by Ortofon on their Cadenza Range of
MC's they are more interested in informing on the advancements in selected for Materials use in the assembly within the Housing .

They do not focus in on any special properties about the Cantilevers in use, but do reference the Aluminium Cantilevers in use.
The Bronze Model is identified as having a Conical Aluminium where as the others in the range are Aluminium.
Again the conical shape could be used, as it has proved to impact on the Sound Produced and separates the Bronze allowing it to be noticeably different to the Siblings.
It might just be a better material to mount the Replicant Stylus onto.

I am not sure how many of the contributors to this thread will be in a position to debate the metallurgy of the Ortofon Cadenza Range of cantilevers 35 Years on from now .      

My first enigma was the so called ''Greek lier paradox'', The Greek who stated that ''all Greek are liers''. The other was how Greek
succeeded to convince ''Slavic immigants'' on the Balkan to believe in ONLY ONE GOD while they were polytheisic originaly? There are many theories about this ''issue''. However nobody try ''economic kind''. Consider the case with 12 Gods  but with only 10 goats. Back than the ''integrity issue'' deed not exist. So trying to ''corrupt'' Gods was not an issue. But well with the problem how to please 12 of them with only 10 goats? Probaly because man are regarded as more valuable ''working force'' the daughters were ''logicaly'' considered to be less ,uh, valuable. So ''ONLY  two of those'' were needed to please all 12 Gods. Well the Greek deed not need more arguments then  that ONE GOD is much cheaper. 

Al2O3 - https://global.kyocera.com/prdct/fc/list/material/alumina/alumina.html
In laboratories and high tech it's used very often. 

@lewm

If you and Raul believe that an aluminum oxide by itself can qualify as a ceramic after appropriate processing, ok.

Thats not what I said. Nowhere did I say "after appropriate processing".
I dont know why, but you are forever rephrasing other folks posts, including misrepresenting what they have said.

Let me spell it out for you

Aluminium Oxide is a ceramic oxide.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/materials-science/aluminum-oxide

Yikes, I didn't think body materials would lead to such a lively discussion. Given the hardness of the body used on the MC3000 MK II, which the Stereophile review says almost 9 on the Moh Scale of Hardness, while that scale shows titanium being 6. Apparently hardness is only part of the equation for resonance issues that are considered in body design. 

Nevertheless, all I was really trying to say is that this is a nice sounding cartridge. In the past I have had the Cadenza Red, Blue, Bronze, original Windfeld, and A90 in my systems. While each of these cartridges had a different presentation, I would say I find this Ortofon to be very close to being on equal footing. With the possible exception of the A90, but that cartridge has a unique presentation and kind of stands apart from other Ortofon cartridges. 

It may very well be possible that there are a level of differences that my system is not up to the task of presenting. Actually I find the tables I use to have very similar presentations, and this may be an end result of colorations further down the equipment chain. So lets talk about the system 

Speakers  JBL 4365 and pair of Velodyne HGS 12 subwoofers
Amplifier   AVM Audio AMP Essential monoblocks
Pre-Amplifier  Halcro DM 8
Phono Stage Esoteric E-03
Speaker wire  Wireworld Eclipse 8
Interconnects  Wireworld Silver Eclipse 8
Power cords  Pi Audio Group 
Power Conditioner  TLP Audio TF130 (previous one was a PS Audio P10)

Turntables 

Scheu Audio Das Laufwerk No2/Dynavector DV505/Ortofon MC 3000 II or Ikeda 9 Kawami

Well Tempered Reference/ZYX 4D

SOTA Cosmos Eclipse/SME V/Transfiguration Audio Proteus

There are differences in presentation to all three tables, but there are many many similarities. The SOTA is the most expansive and dynamic, while the WTR is a bit more rounded and relaxed, and the Scheu falls closer to the WTR tonally but a bit more defined and dynamic. 

Perhaps there are limitations in my gear that homogenize the sound. Perhaps one day I get tired of playing with tables and consolidate them into one top tier table I can afford and call it good. Use the digital rig for casual listening and simplify things with one table and a pair of cartridges. Maybe that happens one day, but probably not next week. 

I think the next step is to obtain a different SUT than the ones I have had and see what happens. To be honest this is a casual cartridge, so I don't want to spend multiple thousands on a SUT for a cartridge that cost me $900. But on the other hand, I don't want to kludge the whole thing together either. Perhaps I will look at vintage transformers and see what can be done that way. 

@neonknight playing around with SUT's can be a worthwhile endeavour as an alternative to an active phono amp. In my experience there's no way to predict if a given cartridge will 'like' the phono stage or SUT better, so it's fun every time you 'hit' a synergy, not unlike hitting on the right tonearm/cartridge combination.

That said, I can wholeheartedly recommend the Ortofon SUT's that were built for the '000' series: T-2000, T-3000, T-5000 and T-7500. They were not exactly cheap, but they do have silver wiring and we all know what new SUT's with silver wiring cost these days. Ebay prices are over the top, but I managed to find my T-3000 on Yahoo auction for a little under $1000.

With the exception of the T-2000 they all offer 30dB of gain with a 3-6 ohm impedance range, so suitable for most LOMC's. The T-2000 has 35dB gain to accommodate the extremily low output MC-2000, but that cartridge works great with the T-3000 as well. Its impedance range is fairly flexible too, so even your Proteus with 1 ohm impedance will sound great. And of course the synergy with your MC-3000mk2 is a given. Certainly worth a try!

Dearn @neonknight : "" It may very well be possible that there are a level of differences that my system is not up to the task of presenting. ""

Overall you own very good system. Your main cartridges are really good but I don’t know if are mated with the " rigth " tonearm. I owned the 505 not my cup of tea, I owned the 5 that’s is better tonearm. I had experiences with the SOTA TTs that are very good units but not with your other 2 TTs.

Maybe you could be rigth in your statement and maybe you can get higher resolution with some changes or fine tunnig in your analog rig.

In the other side your speakers woofer crossover is at 750 hz so in theory that driver is running with frequencies around 28hz-30hz to maybe 850hz-900hz, this is a wide range and the developed IMD is high and does not permits better resolution/definition on the critical reproduced frequencies in that range.

I don’t know if you use your subs as a reinforcing/go deep bass or if you are using its high pass filter to liberate the speakers of bass frequencies to lower the IMD and in this way achieve a better resolution/definition where it matters the most. This is that the subs handle frequencies from around 90hz and below it and the 4365 from 90hz and up. Doing this is critical for room/system higher overall quality performance levels.

R.

Dover, "Forever"?  Really?

@lewm 

Dover, "Forever"? Really?

Yes - check your American-English Merriam-Webster dictionary,
its an adverb, see defnition number 2

forever adverbfor·​ev·​er | \ fə-ˈre-vər  , fȯ-; Southern often fə-ˈe-və \Definition of forever

 (Entry 1 of 2)

1: for a limitless timewants to live forever

2: at all times : CONTINUALLYis forever making bad puns

This should be an interesting experiment. I was attempting to purchase the matching T3000 transformer from a seller on UKAudiomart, but he never responded. 
In the process of looking around I came across a Conrad Johnson HV1. This is an active head amp but it uses Nuvistor tubes. Very few components do use this gain device, and all of them that I have heard sound remarkable. The price was quite reasonable, so I bought it last night. Should have it in about 5 to 7 days, and we are going to give it a shot with the MC3000. 

This seems to be a forgotten head amp but was well received in the day. One owner posted it can be a bit microphonic, I wonder if that is due to the tubes they had installed. I also am curious if it inverts phase like some CJ components do, and if so I will take care of that at the cartridge leads as inverting speaker wires is a pain in the butt. 

Should be a grand experiment!

Back in “the day”, head amps were perhaps more common than SUTs for augmenting phono gain to levels required for LOMC cartridges. One of the best was the Counterpoint SA2, which was all tube. I owned one for a while. It was a bit noisy but mine could have had a problem I was not capable of detecting back then. I think NYAL had one that used nuvistors. Mark Levinson had a solid state model. Let us know how yours works out.

My ZYX headamp is back and I like this flavor a lot with low impedance FR-7f cartridge. Check in my virtual system page on audiogon.

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.

I do think it's a bit better at 2.2g.
 

it would be enough to use an excellent test disk and check how it responds and if it tracks well on the fifth side band
 

Yeah, don't think I own one, but I might.  Usually I am not one for test LPs. My question is really why, not whether it sounds good, although it does.