Edgeware, your comments on the MC7500 vs MC2000 intrigue me. Maybe I need to try harder with my MC7500, but so far in my systems the MC2000 is best. Besides paying attention to azimuth, what else? What tonearms have you used? Thx.
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?
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?
117 responses Add your response
I agree with the general rule that Japan is the best place to look for cartridges made in Japan, but Ortofon might be an exception. Their products are and always have been very popular in Japan and they sold many there, especially SPU’s. Most has already been said about MC2000. My sample came from the personal collection of a UK importer and was very sparingly used. So not NOS, but pretty close. I was apprehensive about the ridiculously low output, but in practice I can make it work without a hint of noise on both an Ortofon T3000 SUT and Boulder 1008 phono amp, both with total line level gain of 70dB. The sound is a benchmark of neutrality and it’s probably the best tracker I have in house. The high compliance is probably the main reason the MC2000 sounds so good (and tracks so well) and generally considered quite a challenge in terms of tonearm synergy. Again I had my doubts, because my system and tonearms are tailored to low output, low impedance AND low compliance cartridges. But again in practice it turned out easy to work with. In a lightweight headshell it even works spendidly in a heavy gun like FR64S with the lighter W170 counterweight. For the record, the lightweight original MC2000 headshell was in silver and made of magnesium, but these didn’t survive the times very well. My sample and all others I’ve seen have what I’d call ’bleeding’, a kind of disintegrating of the material, including the threads that are supposed to hold the cartridge. Mine is useless, but I found a later black version of this headshell (also on chakster’s photo) that works perfectly. The MC7500 was the first ever cartridge with titanium body and has 0,13mV output from 8N copper coils (unique as far as I know) and again a tapered aluminum cantilever with Ortoline stylus (not the Replicant 100, as in MC3000 and MC5000). And if you think the packaging of the MC2000 is lavish, think again and compare it with the leather handbag that came with MC7500. Even my wife, who normally doesn’t give a ’.....’ about my audio hobby, was impressed! Although more congenial in terms of specs, the MC7500 is actually much more difficult to get right. You’ll need a headshell with azimuth adjustment (preferably the dedicated LH7500). The reason is very likely to be the stylus profile, which is unique (4x100 um instead of 5x100um of Replicant 100). But when you do get it right, I would rank it ever so slightly over the MC2000. It has the same kind of neutrality, but with a bit more detail (the stylus profile?) and a bit more slam (copper coils instead of silver coils?). Both are very special cartridges that can still compete head on with A90, A95 or even MC Anna. |
I once and once only put out a Search for a Cartridge in Europe and was for multiple Months approached by scammers, sending ID Images and demanding a Payment. For fun, I inquired if a deal could be done on the Tonearm in the image, amazingly it was on offer as well. When I informed the administration of the Portal, they were extremely helpful and suggested I use another Site if I am not satisfied. I have not suffered anything like this when importing from Japan. Lots of Images, and if not trialled or not wanted to be in a dispute, the Item will be declared as Junk. From my experience, a Purchaser will be quite clear about the Vendors offer and a informed decision can be made. Again Caveat Emptor |
I looked at those two MC2000 on eBay, and they do have issues with cantilevers. One also has surface corrosion. That unfortunately seems to be a common occurrence with audio goods from Japan. Neither one is of interest. I imagine obtaining a properly operating MC2000 is going to be difficult. I suspect I will go another direction. |
I bought mine long time ago, then I tried it with Gold Note PH-10 phono stage, then I put it back into the box. Too many cartridges here, at the moment my current mode phono stage working in my system with FR-7fz. What surprising me the most after a long long break is zyx headamp with my FR-7f. However, If there will be another NOS MC2000 somewhere in the future I will place a bid. |
In my opinion, the remarkable thing about the MC2000 is that it does use an aluminum cantilever and a line contact stylus. Neither is really very exotic. Yet the sound is sublime in either of my two audio systems. This is evidence that one ought not to judge a cartridge a priori based on the materials of which it is made. Chakster, You wrote, "The question is who is your supplier, you can buy NOS MC2000 only from serious collectors of vintage high-end, and they can honestly describe the condition. My NOS sample is absolutely perfect and fully original, I am so happy to have it in my collection of the best LOMC. Never seen a NOS sample for sale, only hardly used or damaged samples." But you MUST have seen an NOS sample for sale at least once; otherwise you wouldn't own one. My advice is, if you have not already done so, see how it mates with your 4212 current-drive phono stage and report back. It's not going to give you any of the pleasure of which it is capable while sitting in its OEM box. |
The question is who is your supplier, you can buy NOS MC2000 only from serious collectors of vintage high-end, and they can honestly describe the condition. My NOS sample is absolutely perfect and fully original, I am so happy to have it in my collection of the best LOMC. Never seen a NOS sample for sale, only hardly used or damaged samples. This is very rare model. Expert Stylus is nice little company and their Paratrace is nice profile, but the genuine Ortofon MC2000 stylus profile is NOT a Replicant 100. The stylus profile is "Symmetrical Contact Line Diamond". The problem why no one can equally retip the stylus tip is its Press-Fit method. Once the diamond is press-fit you can't press-fit another. They can only glue a new tip, but it’s another method. You should ask our @edgewear about model 7500 and related stuff. |
@chakster Yes, this is the problem with a MC2000 or other classic Ortofon. It has to have the OEM cantilever. A diamond can be replaced, Expert Stylus will do this well, although you will have to accept differences between a Paratrace cut and the Replicant 100. How the damping material ages on a classic Ortofon I do not know, that is another point of concern. Sometimes classic audio components just lose the battle with Father Time. |
I also discovered a recent MC 2000 sale Ad’ where a Beryllium Cantilever is in use. 1) This is total BS on yahoo, the cantilever transplanted from Audio-Technica cartridge if you can’t see it ! Gold-Plated Beryllium cantilever is Audio-Technica exclussive. The stylus tip also replaced with glue. This Ortofon MC2000 has been rebuild, stay away from this one! Please do not start this nonsense discussion about rebuild vs. original. The original cantilever on MC2000 is very special aluminum, not just a cheap aluminum junk people can buy today. It’s completely different cantilever and to see it please find a booklet for Ortofon MC2000 and look at the pictures. Ortofon ST-2000 SUT normally goes for $1500 But for the minty fresh condition Ortofon MC-2000 prepare to pay more (it’s impossible to find NOS). 2) Another sample on Yahoo has BENT CANTILEVER. It’s clearly visible that cantilever bent to one side too much. This is used sample in bad condition. Seller explained that you can’s use headshell, treated holes for screws are damaged. And you have no idea about suspension. I also discovered a recent MC 2000 sale Ad’ where a Beryllium Cantilever is in use. I am using Beryllium Cantilevers on my Ortofon MC Rebuilds and am totally satisfied. I have another Ortofon MC rebuild lined up to use the Beryllium with a Ogura Vital. Another Ortofon is another original cartridge and not a Frankenstein made by someone in Japan using cantilever from cheap Audio-Technica cartridge and glued it to the Ortofon MC2000. |
Who is able to supply a beryllium cantilever these days? I thought beryllium was verboten. Regardless, the MC2000 came with an unusual aluminum cantilever, and it might be best to stick with the OEM cantilever in order to preserve the original SQ, particularly because beryllium and aluminum are so different in their character. However if it sounds good, it is good. |
Recent Adverts About $1000 will get you owning the complete Set Up Caveat Emptor Applies to these types of sales. I also discovered a recent MC 2000 sale Ad' where a Beryllium Cantilever is in use. I am using Beryllium Cantilevers on my Ortofon MC Rebuilds and am totally satisfied. I have another Ortofon MC rebuild lined up to use the Beryllium with a Ogura Vital. orutohonn ortofon MC-2000 operation unused goods : Real Yahoo auction salling Ortofon T-2000 MC step up trafo, silver wiring *reservert * | Hifisentralen |
I own both an MC2000 and an MC7500. I cannot recall what is the difference between an MC2000 Mk2 and the original MC2000, but it may have to do with the signal voltage output, 0.05mV for the MC2000. I rank the MC2000 as one of the two or three best cartridges I have ever heard in my life. Scuttlebutt is that the Mk2 version and the MC3000 were just attempts to increase the output voltage but that the trade-off was a loss of "magic". I rank the MC2000 ahead of the MC7500 (and ahead of most other LOMC cartridges), but the MC7500 is also superb. The big issue with the MC2000 is, of course, its miniscule voltage output. I have three high end, high output phono stages, and none of them really cut the mustard with this cartridge, even though the results were good enough for me to hear that it is special. As you probably know, the MC2000 was originally marketed with a matching SUT; I think it’s called the T2000. I have never owned a SUT, and the T2000 is at least as rare as the MC2000. So I was not about to go that route. Finally, Dave Slagle of Intact Audio and EMIA came to my aid. Dave built me a special solid state head amp with a very low input impedance. I think we calculated that it adds 24db of gain. I plug that into the MM inputs of a Manley Steelhead, set for 55db of gain, and this seems to work very well. Ergo, plan on 80db of total gain that you can get one way or another (phono plus linestage, for example). Why is this cartridge so great? I think it could be because it has minimal turns of wire on its coils, resulting in very low moving mass (and also its tiny voltage output). It also is high compliance compared to nearly every other MC cartridge. You correctly surmise that you need a low effective mass tonearm, and, since I run my own MC2000 on a DV505 using a carbon fiber headshell, I can say the DV505 can work great. (Don’t use the OEM DV headshell; it is too heavy.) Finally, since the MC2000 has a very very low internal resistance of 2 ohms, it actually makes a good amount of current. (Current output = voltage output/internal resistance. 0.05mV/2 ohms = 25uA) It’s extremely well suited to drive one of the "current-drive" phono stages. I’d love to try that. It’s instructive to re-read Gordon Holt’s original review of the MC2000 in Stereophile. He noted that in order to achieve the accepted range of resonant frequency, one in theory would need to use a tonearm with total effective mass of 5 grams!!! Because of the relatively high mass of the cartridge and its unusually high compliance. |
I can only say than between MC2000 and next mkII version you have to choose MC2000 first version (not mkII). The MC2000 is very rare model, dedicated headshell included in the box. This is my NOS sample. And this is a booklet. MC 2000 incorporates Ortofon’s patented Wide Range Damping System, and a new Symmetrical Contact Line diamond. Low-output moving coil with 0.05mV output! Frequency response; 5Hz–50kHz. It was released in 1985 and official price was $1000. I just tried to convert 1k (80’s dollars) to today’s dollars and it’s about $2300. The MC-2000 sure looks as if it’s worth the money. It comes packed in a black-finished wooden box with rabbeted joints, no less, and brushed aluminum latches. The inside is lined with a dark-blue velvet-like material, and has a lift-up hinged panel on top of which nest the cartridge, an Ortofon headsheil, and a "certificate" listing quality-control measurements on the enclosed cartridge. Made in Denmark. P.S. The mkII is cheap and very easy to find model, you can recognize it my white plastic (ceramic) body, this model is veery often available for sale for $500. The first version (the original MC2000) is much more expensive cartridge, extremely rare in mint condition or NOS, and you can recognize is by aluminum body and tapered aluminum pipe cantilever. Make sure the cantilever is original, this type of cantilever is not available today from any retipper and not even from Ortofon. You may need a dedicated SUT designed by Ortofon for this particular cartridge. This cart is very difficult to run with conventional phono stage, you need a high gain and super low noise. The sound quality is absolutely amazing if you can find the right phono stage, sut or headamp for this super low output model. |