Vinyl Asylum: REVIEW: Ortofon 2M Black Phono Cartridge by esande

Model:	2M Black
Category:	Phono Cartridge
Suggested Retail Price:	$699
Description:	2M Black - The 2M series were developed in conjunction with Danish designer Møller Jensen Design – the same designer who designed the award winning MC Jubilee and Kontrapunkt series. Inspired by the facets of a diamond, whose contours gracefully trace the grooves on a record’s surface, the 2M’s handsome elegance establishes a great combination of form and functionality.
Manufacturer URL:	Ortofon
Model Picture:	View

Review by esande on October 29, 2011 at 16:13:09
IP Address: 74.96.129.229 Add Your Review
for the 2M Black

I'm a moving magnet kind of guy. I've never heard a moving coil cartridge in my life that I know of, and I'll admit it. I grant that I may be missing something, and perhaps I'm narrow minded about that. Maybe someday.

But for right now I'm going to ask your indulgence to write about what may be two of the best MM cartridges ever, then and now.

These suspects are the Shure V15 VMR (not the VxMR) and the Ortofon 2M Black. They have much in common but as I hope you'll see the 2M is NOT the successor to the Shure VMR as has been stated elsewhere.

They are completely different cartridges, for a start they are of different eras.

But for your listening pleasure I have, at great cost, imported (in some cases, a lot of it is domestic) the EXACT SAME platform to listen to both under equal conditions.

That would be a Technics SR-1210 MK5 and a Graham Slee Reflex phono stage. Now you can't fault my efforts to make this an equal comparison.

Both cartridges are mounted in stock Technics headshells. Everything upstream is exactly the same in every detail.

In case you think this is an unfair comparison, the Shure with beryllium cantilever and line contact MR stylus cost about $250 in 1984. In 2010 dollars that's about US$550 now. But with a JICO SAS stylus it's a bit more.

Yes, the Ortofon 2M Black is US$700. It's damn expensive. But compared to the V15 VMR in its day, it's in the ballpark.

Now let's look at the actual published numbers.

Cartridge weight is similar, with the Shure clocking in at 6.6g and the Ortofon at 7.2g. Both are in the envelope for Technics' recommendations for not needing the headshell weight plate or auxiliary tonearm weight. In fact this proved to be the case. The Shure is a little lighter and the Ortofon heavier, but both in range although at opposite extremes.

Both are good matches to the 1200 arm. Recommended tracking forces come in at a wash, the Shure wants a slightly lighter force with the stabilizer up, at 1.25g and the Ortofon wants 1.5g. My experience is that the Shure does better with the stabilizer down and the VTF at 1.8g or so. Of course the Ortofon has no stabilizer, but it tracks as well as the Shure does, I think, which is giving the Ortofon props.

But here is the crux of the biscuit. When you look at the numbers, the Ortofon blows the Shure away. Which it should. Given 1983 versus 2007 and all that, there isn't that much physical difference.

Except those irritating little items like channel balance ( <1.5 db for the Shure, <1.0 db for the Ortofon), channel separation (> 25 db Shure, > 26 db Ortofon) and above all the frequency response numbers.

The GSP Reflex I'm using really thinks frequency response is important (see my review here). If you think you can't hear this, well, you're wrong.

So the Ortofon claims 20 Hz to 31 kHz and the Shure 20 Hz to 20 kHz. It seems to make a difference in terms of air and soundstage.

Now to the actual break-in periods. I didn't have to break in the Shure. I've used it since 1984, although I did go to a Jico SAS stylus earlier this year. I'm very happy with it in that configuration, more than happy. It's a detail-extracting fiend in every regard. It plays extremely well with the GSP Reflex.

It's in the groove, in short. Everything I admire about a good Shure is there in spades. Smooth frequency response, probably the best phono pickup I've ever heard in terms of overall balance and tone. Detail is there.

So, why did I try the Ortofon? Well, I had this US$700 that I didn't need right now? Not exactly.

I did it for the air and space. And because I wanted to see what a state of the art MM cartridge sounds like these days. Well, it sounded bright and congested out of the (very ordinary) box, I can't say the packaging was all that great, nice, definitely, two-piece styrofoam cube with two tubes inside, a big glasslike one holding the cartridge in a secure mount and a smaller plastic one containing a barely adequate screwdriver, a stylus brush, and a freaky stylus force guage.

(This is the actual review part, BTW)

So I mounted the cartridge per instructions in a new Technics headshell that I'd fortuitously ordered from KAB, it wasn't a problem. Following instructions as I usually do was impossible with the included "manual", apparently the Danish as well as the Japanese have perfect eyesight.

However the manual is online in .pdf format. Which is easier.

This wasn't a real challenge. I've mounted cartridges before and with the help of the excellent protractor that Ken Ellis gave me and the Technics overhang gauge it was a piece of cake, I was up and running in short order.

Apparently I managed to wire it correctly first try, which can be an issue but wasn't in this case. Of course I removed the stylus first, and being able to do that easily is a big plus with this cartridge.

The threaded screw mounts are nice.

Build quality is good but not exceptional, everything is tight and as expected. The stylus guard is nice and fits well.

VTF and VTA were easy, I managed to balance the tonearm no problem and dial in the VTF. I checked it with a Shure SFG-2 and the Technics calibration was a little high but not by much, off by a tenth of a gram but that may have been the angle I was looking at. Fixed it with the SFG-2.

VTA looks right with arm level, I'll check that again but by eye the arm is level.using the index card method. The arm, BTW, is at the lowest setting which also worked for the Shure, but the Shure is improved slightly by a small upward adjustment, very small though. I'm using a Herbie's mat over a thin felt mat which collectively is about the same stack height as the original Technics rubber mat.

Azimuth looks good, setup basically a success.

Now the surprise was the 2M's output of 5 mV vs the Shure's 3.2 mV.

That's a huge difference, well, I had to adjust to it. This sucker has a high output compared to the MMs of my past. Luckily the phono stage seems to be comfortable with it.

For the break in period I used Jim Carroll's "Dry Dreams," which is a pretty good lp but not one I minded dedicating to this task. This particular copy was bought used in 1984 or so. ATCO SC 38-145 if you're interested.

Which if you listen to enough will convince you that for a heroin addict draft-dodger he was a pretty bright cat. Anyway he died of a heart attack a couple of years back (2009) at age 60, so a word to the wise.

Anyway, some pretty tasty cuts on this one, "Evangeline" kicks ass. Overall a very well recorded lp, sort of literate punk. Kind of like him.

After 20 hours of Jim Carroll, I was kind of getting burned out, but the 2M was still trucking, and also getting there. The initially congested and too-bright sound was smoothing out and expanding nicely. Bass became more evident. The detail, which was already good, became more precise and the soundstage began to open up.

I decided at this point that it was time to change records (thanks, we were getting tired of Jim Carroll). The Shure TTR117 was a little boring, but at least I can say I played a 45, and everything worked out. According to that record everything was set up right.

Next up was MCA-1693, aka Steely Dan's "Gaucho." This is a reissue, allegedly "audiophile" pressing. Well, it's pretty good. In fact it sounds VERY good. I guess the 2M just got to finding its soundstaging.

Detail is very nice, and instrumental separation is excellent. Not that this was by any stretch a live recording, but as nearly as the Ortofon and I can tell no mice farted in the studio, ha ha.

A note on the appearence, not that anyone really cares. The Shure LOOKS American, you'd know it a mile away (well maybe not a mile, but close). The Ortofon looks Danish modern (go figure). Of course we don't really care what they look like, only how they sound.

Right, so what's the verdict?

Well, I'll admit the 2M is a definite contender here, and strictly going between these two carts the Ortofon has it based on detail and smooth upper frequency response.

Based on overall presentation and bass, the Shure is to my ear the winner.

But, which one is going to stay on the tonearm? Probably the Ortofon, for now, both because I love the detail and separation and also because I'm not convinced it's fully run in yet.

Either one is a good choice for a MM cartridge. But they are not the same and I don't think the 2M is the successor to the V15.

Thanks for reading the review.

Product Weakness:	Price, a tad light on the bass
Product Strengths:	Detail, soundstaging, extended top end without stridency or sibilance

Associated Equipment for this Review:

Amplifier: Bryston 4BSST pro
Preamplifier (or None if Integrated): Rogue Audio Metis, NOS Raytheon tubes
Sources (CDP/Turntable): Technics 1210MK5
Speakers: Magnestand 1.6QRs
Cables/Interconnects: Cardas 300B
Music Used (Genre/Selections): Rock, punk, classical
Time Period/Length of Audition: 35 hours
Type of Audition/Review: Product Owner

Amplifier:	Bryston 4BSST pro
Preamplifier (or None if Integrated):	Rogue Audio Metis, NOS Raytheon tubes
Sources (CDP/Turntable):	Technics 1210MK5
Speakers:	Magnestand 1.6QRs
Cables/Interconnects:	Cardas 300B
Music Used (Genre/Selections):	Rock, punk, classical
Time Period/Length of Audition:	35 hours
Type of Audition/Review:	Product Owner