View Full Version : Rega RB700 vs Linn Ittok VII
On a non-Linn turntable, which of these tonearms will be preferable ?
Looking for a lively and dynamic tonearm in general. The cartridge will be either a Dynavector 17d3 or EMT TSD-15. The Rega will get a cardas rewiring btw.
I am also checking out the Linn Ekos vs Naim ARO, provided I decide to stretch my budget.
Leaving sonics aside for a moment.
The Rega is serviceable and will take some punishment. Linn abandoned Ittok servicing many years ago and the newest LV II's will be twenty five years old and many with suspect provenance, knurdled headshells, overtightened pillar bolt leaving nasty scars on the pillar, screws going loose and possibly suspect bearings.
I hate to spoil the fun, but unless you can examine the Ittok before buying, and living where you are, well away from Audio Origami, I'd be almost inclined to give old Ittoks a wide berth. If you're happy to send one overseas for a full rebuild chez Johnnie, it's a lively if slightly treble-rough sounding tonearm away from an LP12.
The Ekos is another one as above. Early ones could seize up their bearings with congealed adhesives and sonics suffer badly if this happens. Linn would replace the arm on an exchange basis, but of course, the punter paid dearly for the privilege. Sounded a bit "clanky" to me, but then, I much prefer the SME V, accepting that some find it too restrained for their tastes. The mk2 Ekos was better in sonics than the mk1 and apparently has totally different materials in its construction and this may be the better option if the one you buy is in great condition.
The RB series in general either work really well on a deck or sound bloomin' awful I've found. The bearings are superb and hand matched to the shafts, the external wiring and finish on the 700 is better too than the RB300.
The Aro isn't a universal tonearm, but I grew to love it as the years went on. Very expensive and finish is everything, but despite wobbling all over the place, it does seem to work well long term.
Thanks Dave.
So, it will most probably be a RB700 or Ekos2 or ARO.
What do you say about the sonics of an ARO ? Would you prefer it to a Ekos2 ?
Let me put it this way, I use a Verdier TT and to me the only area where I want some improvement is liveliness and some pace. I currently use a SME 3012 which ofcourse doesnt help in these matters. So, I am looking for tonearm which can help me with little more of life and speed, BUT I want to avoid unipivot. I want a gimballed arm because I normally find them to be better with relatively worn out records (which I have many). I am considering ARO only because it is a Naim, I trust their engineering and sonics.
So, are their other arms that I could consider ? Budget is GBP 1k.
Thanks Dave.
So, it will most probably be a RB700 or Ekos2 or ARO.
What do you say about the sonics of an ARO ? Would you prefer it to a Ekos2 ?
I realise I am not Dave and, in truth, our opinions rarely seem to be aligned, but I have used Rega, Linn and Naim arms. The Ekos is very like the Ittok in overall sound and the condition of the bearings can actually make either of them outperform the other (in my experience). The problem with all ball-race bearing arms is that such bearings are not designed for the very small levels of movement and rotation a tonearm experiences; movement is so low (and limited) that the balls may not make even one full rotation during the life of the arm. Partly as a result of this the lubrication in the bearings can (and does) dry out over time, increasing friction (stiction) and creating he 'notchy' feel which is often blamed on over tightening of the cartridge.
If considering an Ekos, it is worth bearing in mind (no pun intended) that the headshell is very short (much shorter than the Ittok)and longer cartridges, or ones that need to be fitted far back in the headshell, may not fit, or may prove very tricky to fit. Apparently, Linn have recently decided to address this well known issue (it's only taken 20 years ;)).
As Dave states, the Aro is not really a universal tonearm. It has no lift/lower device (though I personally have no problem with this) and it requires a mounting point for the arm rest. Unlike Dave, I didn't think the Aro (which isn't now made any more) was particularly expensive for what it was.
In terms of sound, the Ekos is all about absolute Dynamic and sharp leading edge attack. but can sound rather forced. The Aro is a much more subtle performer and excels in terms of inner detail and subtle counterpoint. It is common to read that the Aro has a great mid-band but is rolled off at the frequency extremes. Unlike most, I have used an Aro on both Linn LP12's (of various levels of specification) and on an entirely different design of deck. It is true that the Aro is not as dry sounding as the Ekos, but it is not curtailed, or rolled off, at the frequency extremes.
My experience of the Rega, although much more limited, would suggest that it lies somewhere between the two. Ultimately, I didn't find it as vivid as the Ekos, nor as finely shaded or 'hear into' as the Aro.
What I would add though, is that how any arm sounds is very much dependant on what it is attached to. I have experimented quite extensively over the years with armboard design and materials, and I have found that this aspect has far more impact than many give it credit for and many aspects of an arms sound quality are really reflections of more than just the arm.
If considering an Ekos, it is worth bearing in mind (no pun intended) that the headshell is very short (much shorter than the Ittok)and longer cartridges, or ones that need to be fitted far back in the headshell, may not fit, or may prove very tricky to fit. Apparently, Linn have recently decided to address this well known issue (it's only taken 20 years ;)).
As Dave states, the Aro is not really a universal tonearm. It has no lift/lower device (though I personally have no problem with this) and it requires a mounting point for the arm rest. Unlike Dave, I didn't think the Aro (which isn't now made any more) was particularly expensive for what it was.
In terms of sound, the Ekos is all about absolute Dynamic and sharp leading edge attack. but can sound rather forced. The Aro is a much more subtle performer and excels in terms of inner detail and subtle counterpoint. It is common to read that the Aro has a great mid-band but is rolled off at the frequency extremes. Unlike most, I have used an Aro on both Linn LP12's (of various levels of specification) and on an entirely different design of deck. It is true that the Aro is not as dry sounding as the Ekos, but it is not curtailed, or rolled off, at the frequency extremes.
My experience of the Rega, although much more limited, would suggest that it lies somewhere between the two. Ultimately, I didn't find it as vivid as the Ekos, nor as finely shaded or 'hear into' as the Aro.
What I would add though, is that how any arm sounds is very much dependant on what it is attached to. I have experimented quite extensively over the years with armboard design and materials, and I have found that this aspect has far more impact than many give it credit for and many aspects of an arms sound quality are really reflections of more than just the arm.
In pretty well all of this, you and me Mark, are VERY well aligned and you've described it far better than I :)
My feelings on price are obviously the most subjective of all and, much as I respect the SME V still, the price is ridiculous these days - in my opinion obviously, although I accept that in both these arms, the finish is superb and needs to be in the ARO for the way the inner bearing shaft locates tightly but with perfect freedom in the adustable pillar for overall height.
Production numbers is a significant issue with the cost of arm manufacture. If you look at the cost of arms produced outside of the UK you quickly see that many aspiring to 'state of the art' are extremely expensive indeed - look at the cost of the current Ekos (make sure you are sitting down) and even that isn't that expensive compared to many.
With regard to the Aro, I think there are a number of reasons it performs as it does that similar arms do not cover. As you say, it is nicely machined, milled and turned entirely from billet and anodised. In comparison to other arms, it has relatively few extra bits (both a plus and a negative) and compared to pretty much all other unipivots (Except perhaps the Kuzma), it has a very stiff headshell/armtube/bearing bell construction. Such a construction is used in many gimbal bearing arms, but many unipivots still use flimsy, unbraced, headshells etc.
(glad to hear our thoughts are aligned on this Dave - not so sure I explained myself all that well though)
Thank you guys for a world of information about these arms. I am really grateful!
So can I take away that:
1. While Ekos is more vivid in its presentation, the ARO is not dull ? It is important for me to know this because as stated in my previous post, I would like have an arm which is lively.
2. The ARO is not rolled off in the frequency extremes as commented by some, I am curious about this. Yes, I have read it often that ARO doesnt go as deep in the bass as ittok or extend very well into the highs. What could be the reason ? Cartridge matching ? Badly setup ?
To this discussion if I add couple of usual suspects which I hope to find used under GBP 1k, the Graham 2.2 and Origin live Illustrious/Conqueror, how will they compare with ARO/Ekos ? Any suggestions ?
Most assessments of the Aro have been made with it fitted to a mid spec LP12, with the laminate armboard and glued steel chassis - certainly these aspects impact significantly on the sound of the Aro. Despite the fact that it seems less superficially rigid than a gimbal arm, it actually transmits a significant (in arm terms) amount of energy into the armboard. In addition, I would say adjustment of the Aro makes quite a lot of difference - as it does on any good arm. Add to this that many people just repeat what they have read/heard and adopt this 'knowledge' as their own.
Neither the Aro or Ekos could be described in such simplistic terms as sharp or dull, they are both way too good and complex sounding for this. Certainly the Aro is, in no way, dull. My system extends to 20Hz and bass weight, depth and impact are not missing.
I have very little experience of the OL arms.
I've heard the Graham a number of times, but never in a system/situation I am sufficiently familiar with as to be able to draw any conclusions. However, what I would say is that the Graham is a surprisingly bulky and heavy design - check that it will physically fit on your deck. The other thing is that it is a very complex structure due to the number of adjustments it offers. Whilst the ability to adjust parameters is a good thing in itself, the mechanism needed to achieve this may well introduce issues of its own and, in general, I would say that the fewer the parts, the better.
Another agreement with Mark here :eek: :lol:
When I first heard the ARO on launch and having got used to the odd way it handles compared to other arms, I thought it squidgey in the bass and unfocused in the treble. The Ittok at the time, especially the then new LVIII, followed by the Ekos in working mk1 form, had better sonic "architecture" on the LP12 of the period and although our resident Naimie (blindly) loved it - could have been a pile of poo with their logo on! the rest of us weren't sure. Roll forward fifteen years and I rejoined my final audio industry employer part-time after a short spell on the road. An old client of mine who'd followed me, had ordered a brand new LP12, ARO and Dynavector XX2 (IIRC). The deck fell together in comparison with the messy setups of the early 80's especially, setting up was a breeze and the thing sounded wonderful. The Cirkus and plinth mods (motor bolt and hard, close tolerance main mounting blocks) transformed the bass for the better and the lead-on from this was that the treble regions acquired a focus and precision unheard of before on Linns. transferring this over to the ARO, transformed it IMO and obviously, what's left of the old fruitbox LP12 has been transformed again with one-piece? sub-chassis' and now even a cast top-plate (Tiger-Paw?).
The thing is, although I haven't tried it (and am never likely to now), the current three-screw fixing Rega arms with revised arm internals may well be really good on a wider range of decks. Technically, the bearings on the stainless-steel based Rega arms have been excellent for the job and the remaining resonances in the RB tube have been all but banished, making it as inert as possible. Origin Live seem to like ADDING midrange problems to add "excitement" and finish has reportedly been variable in the past, but obviously, personal taste and the turntable "system" used plays a huge part in this.
You know, you could always add an SME 309 to the final list, as these are superb value for money and IMO possibly "nicer" sounding than the IV and V, depending on what they're used with ;)
If I may Dave, a couple of minor points, neither of the cast components you mention are actually cast and, with respect, I would recommend the RubiKon over either (it certainly transforms the sound of the Aro).
Not that any of that is relevant in this particular case.
Because of the company that made the Aro (Naim) and the dealers they sold (sell) through, it was rare to find the Aro fitted to anything other than an LP12. However, this was largely a matter of convenience more than anything else. Naim used to supply the Aro with a pre-prepared LP12 armboard and, because of the armrest, the Aro is tricky to mount on many decks (though the weight of the arm is low and the geometry is pretty standard). When turntable manufacturers did make armboards for the Aro, it was more with an eye to meeting these practical requirements rather than actually developing the optimum choice of design, construction and materials; as a result, sonic results were something of a lottery.
Not cast? Please elaborate for me? Would it not be better to do a basic casting and then machine it? Taking a solid billet and machining this would mess up the metal structure, or is this the deliberate intention :confused:
I didn't mention the keel or Rubykon specifically, and don't think the OP has an LP12 to start with - famous thread drift again with apologies. I'll edit my post above..
No, it is rather the other way round, a casting will have quite a granular structure. In addition, it is difficult to cast thin flat sections as they are prone to deformation as cooling takes place (ask Michell....). All things being equal, a machined from billet component will be significantly stronger and less brittle than a cast component. In addition, CNC machining from billet is often more economic when dealing with small batch production. If one was to cast a component, one wouldn't then machine all surfaces (one may as well just machine it from billet in the first place) - only key surfaces are post machined and non essential surfaces will retain the cast finish - this is clearly not the case with either of these components.
In addition, I'm certain that both the components you mention are CNC milled from sheet/billet rather than cast (as in both cases they (or their manufacturers) have discussed it with me).
Any way, as you say, it's irrelevant in this case as the OP doesn't have an LP12.
You know, on reflection, I'm just being pedantic - whether they are cast or machined from solid is academic and doesn't impact on the validity of the point you were making.
Thanks for the explanation. It IS relevant, if not specifically to this thread, but this is AOS after all :lol:
Are they not outside of your budget if you are already having to stretch to reach a second hand Ekos or Aro?
Just in, especially the 2.2 in the used market.
You might also want to listen to Well Tempered arm, Funk FXR, and Roksan Nima.
That arm in your avatar looks like it may be up at the back guv'nor :) proibably my eyes though, but if it's a SME, the company make a cartridge spacer just for this purpose.....
Sorry about that and back to topic - cough - The Nima is one arm I keep forgetting about. It looks like a fully updated Formula 4 that's done some weight training in the intervening years and I liked it a lot when I used one in the shop. It's difficult to terminally overdamp the unipivot, although a little does halp with stability and ease of use. When I was out on the road twelve years ago, I met Touraj again and he invited me to the UK factory/offices. I never went but should have done - I was living in a total (rather than partial) fog back then and didn't know what the heck I was doing most of the time, a total fish out of water!
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.