david ellwood
Kirabosi Kognoscente
Lester , have you already got a keel and radikal2, maybe the tonearm isn’t the weak link?
Upgraded Ittok LVII vs Ekos 2
- Thread starter retseldrib
- Start date
sktn77a
pfm Member
Well, "harshness " may be a little over-stated, there was a slight prominence in the upper mid range - perhaps "splashy" is a better description. When I upgraded from an Ittok LVII to an Ekos 2, that's the only difference I noticed.
I wouldn't bother rewiring any of these arms unless there's a problem.
retseldrib
pfm Member
My current spec: Linn Sondek LP12 - 1981 Plinth with original baseboard and top-plate Majik subchassis, Karousel, Lingo 4, Ittok LVII, T-KABLE, AT-OC9XSH moving coil cart
The Keel and Radikal2 are outside my budget plus I do not want a hole drilled in the Keel to accommodate my Ittok.
I have been wanting to smarten up the LP12 with a new corner braced plinth, top-plate with extra stud and a trampolin for a while which can now be done for just over £1000 with the Linn summer offer. While the deck is with the dealer I thought it a good opportunity upgrade the tone arm or perhaps get a kore with an Ekos 2 as don’t want a hole drilled in the kore. However, my dealer will only fit a tonearm they have supplied or the existing one on my turntable; so if they don’t have a used Ekos then I would rather get my Ittok upgraded (mainly for longevity purposes with the hope of a slight sound improvement) and then save for a used keel/ Radikal/ Ekos 2
John
Rack’em Up!
Here’s a nice description of the physical aspects of the Ekos 2 taken from this Stereophile article:
The $1995 Ekos (so christened after the French name for Scotland, Ecosse—ha!) is considerably more expensive than the Ittok LVII ($965); superficially, it resembles the black version of the Ittok that was available for a while by special order. The arm-base even uses the same three-bolt mounting arrangement, but the arm is otherwise almost totally different. Whereas the Ittok is manufactured in Japan to Linn's specification, with only final quality control taking place in Linn Products' Glasgow headquarters, the Ekos is manufactured and assembled in Scotland, the only Japan-sourced item being the lift/lower device. The most obvious external difference is the absence of the separate arm clip on the tonearm board, which some UK audiophiles had long proclaimed to be a source of coloration. The same audiophiles had also pointed the finger at the lift/lower device; this remains, but is now damped in both directions, and its support gantry is extended along the arm axis to provide a solid clip arrangement similar to that used by the SME V.
The arm-tube remains the same thin-wall, wide-bore aluminum design, but is about 8mm longer than that of the Ittok. The geometry remains the same, the aluminum-alloy headshell being shorter, but this is now machined from solid for maximum strength rather than being cast. Machining would seem appropriate, Linn having a large collection of some of the most modern computer-controlled industrial tools in the UK; machining also gives the designer a wider choice of alloys to choose from. In addition, whereas the Ittok headshell was fixed to the arm-tube with screws, the Ekos uses a modern adhesive, the same as used to glue the Sondek's subchassis together. This is said to give a stronger, more consistent joint. The arm-tube is also glued to the rear body that carries the counterweight. The undersurface of the headshell has a line enscribed on its rear to allow for easy set-up of pickups with square rear faces.
The gimbal bearings are also something special compared with the Ittok. These are manufactured to a tolerance of 5µm (approximately 0.2 thou'). Then, because, as one of Linn's senior engineers, Martin Dalgleish, puts it, "It's easier to measure than it is to make," the bearings are measured and matched to a tolerance of just 1µm. Not surprisingly, I could feel no play in any direction.
The tracking downforce and bias force are still set with springs, but these are said to be to a tighter tolerance than the Ittok. The final difference concerns the tonearm leads. Yes, these are still the same coaxial type, fitted with good-quality phono plugs, but the 5-pin arm plug is now metal and can be fixed tighter. It is also shallower, allowing a little more clearance between the dressed cable and the turntable baseplate.
The $1995 Ekos (so christened after the French name for Scotland, Ecosse—ha!) is considerably more expensive than the Ittok LVII ($965); superficially, it resembles the black version of the Ittok that was available for a while by special order. The arm-base even uses the same three-bolt mounting arrangement, but the arm is otherwise almost totally different. Whereas the Ittok is manufactured in Japan to Linn's specification, with only final quality control taking place in Linn Products' Glasgow headquarters, the Ekos is manufactured and assembled in Scotland, the only Japan-sourced item being the lift/lower device. The most obvious external difference is the absence of the separate arm clip on the tonearm board, which some UK audiophiles had long proclaimed to be a source of coloration. The same audiophiles had also pointed the finger at the lift/lower device; this remains, but is now damped in both directions, and its support gantry is extended along the arm axis to provide a solid clip arrangement similar to that used by the SME V.
The arm-tube remains the same thin-wall, wide-bore aluminum design, but is about 8mm longer than that of the Ittok. The geometry remains the same, the aluminum-alloy headshell being shorter, but this is now machined from solid for maximum strength rather than being cast. Machining would seem appropriate, Linn having a large collection of some of the most modern computer-controlled industrial tools in the UK; machining also gives the designer a wider choice of alloys to choose from. In addition, whereas the Ittok headshell was fixed to the arm-tube with screws, the Ekos uses a modern adhesive, the same as used to glue the Sondek's subchassis together. This is said to give a stronger, more consistent joint. The arm-tube is also glued to the rear body that carries the counterweight. The undersurface of the headshell has a line enscribed on its rear to allow for easy set-up of pickups with square rear faces.
The gimbal bearings are also something special compared with the Ittok. These are manufactured to a tolerance of 5µm (approximately 0.2 thou'). Then, because, as one of Linn's senior engineers, Martin Dalgleish, puts it, "It's easier to measure than it is to make," the bearings are measured and matched to a tolerance of just 1µm. Not surprisingly, I could feel no play in any direction.
The tracking downforce and bias force are still set with springs, but these are said to be to a tighter tolerance than the Ittok. The final difference concerns the tonearm leads. Yes, these are still the same coaxial type, fitted with good-quality phono plugs, but the 5-pin arm plug is now metal and can be fixed tighter. It is also shallower, allowing a little more clearance between the dressed cable and the turntable baseplate.
That's right. If you have a Linn-specific sub-chassis like the Magk or Kore you cannot fit a Rega arm to it. You would have to change it. Which is a big argument for sticking with a Linn arm. Whatever the pros and cons of the various Ittok and Ekos variants at least you know that they are likely to be sonically similar enough that if you like one you will probably like the others.
A Rega arm is an unknown that would involve cost and risk. Personally, I think it's a better option but me saying that is no different from those who champion the Aro or any other alternative. You might prefer it or you might not. A Linn arm is a safer option.
Probably.