Tonearm/Cartridge Compatability

Personally, I do not think the Ortofon TA-110 would be an ideal match with the 2M Black; with that cartridge I would be looking for an arm with a slightly lower effective mass, something in the 12-15 gram effective mass range.

I also don't see much value in the TA-110 arm. It is made for Ortofon by Jelco. The TA-110 will definitely have adjustable VTA, although it appears to use a headshell inferior to the stock Jelco headshell, which is adjustable for azimuth.

The Jelco 750D (which the Ortofon certainly appears to be based on) also offers oil damping which is not available on the Ortofon and which would be beneficial with a medium to higher compliance cartridge like the 2M Black.

So you can spend approximately $1500 on the Ortofon and have no fluid damping capability and no adjustment for azimuth (unless you turn around and buy a Jelco headshell for it), or you can spend about $600-$700 on the Jelco 750D and get the oil damping and azimuth capability.

If you are fixed on the 2M Black I would probably look elsewhere at other arms but if you really wanted the Ortofon, I'd take the 750D over it in a flash under the circumstances.

I've had past setups as low as ~ 7.1 Hz calculated resonance; with that cart (Ortofon MC Windfeld) I had phenomenal bass quality/impact, amazing detail retrieval, and razor-sharp imaging, but the top end was too hot for my tastes -- possibly a result of the cartridge's character combined with my speakers (seems unlikely to have been caused by a 7Hz resonance). I do prefer Koetsus, after all. I suppose it depends on your turntable and any warp controls (ring clamp, vacuum hold down) you may have implemented. I had neither.

You could use a lighter headshell to move resonance up into safe range. Ortofon sells an oak & Urushi lacquer headshell @ 9.5 grams that would get you above 7.5Hz. I've used that shell on my high-mass Fidelity Research arm.

You can also get headshells with adjustable azimuth, but that feature usually brings along higher mass. I'd go for a lighter non-azimuth shell; the 2M Black may sound excellent with azimuth fine-tuning, but it also sounds very good on non-adjustable arms.

That Ortofon arm looks like another Jelco-built unit with Ortofon mods; it should be nice. However, by the numbers it's going to be a more natural match with MC carts like the Cadenza series (the Cadenza Red being a very worthy upgrade over a 2M black). I can confirm that the Cadenza/Kontrapunkt series worked beautifully on my own high mass (20g) S-shape FR64fx tonarm. That line has a nice low-ish compliance of 12, great for an 18-20g arm.

Thank you all for your most helpful input. Yesterday evening, I was discussing this with Chris Thornton of Artisan Fidelity. Apparently one of the problems with determining resonance levels for matching tonearms and cartridges, is the lack of standardization by manufacturers for cartridge compliance. For example, Ortofon measures dynamic lateral compliance for the 2M Black in different units than those used for the Sumico Blackbird. Of course the quality of sound is the ultimate determination, but it pays to be on track with the specs to start with. Isn't it time for cartridge manufacturers to standardize? Ciao, GK

Hi Greg,
Fortunately Ortofon always uses the proper @10 Hz dynamic compliance measurement, which is what's expected by most of the online resonance calculators (like the one you were using). Static compliance (i.e. 0 Hz) numbers will be much higher than their 10Hz equivalent, and @ 100Hz numbers (often used by Japanese manufacturers, e.g. Koetsu) will be significantly lower. I've read that you can multiply an @100Hz number by a factor of 1.5x-2x in order to get a very loose approximation of its equivalent @ 10Hz value.

It certainly is annoying to deal with compliance numbers not @10Hz. Even worse would be a listed compliance number without any information on whether it's static/10Hz/100Hz.