This…? Which is…? I think I can guess, but…
Linn Koil 
Sorry, was not trying to be cryptic - I mean kryptic.
5 Likes
Is that an Ittok or an Ekos…? I cannot tell… 
Ekos 2
I’m sure there are several visual differences but I can’t think what they are right now
4 Likes
Not much - between a late Ittok and an Ekos, AFAIK.
I knew it wasn’t an early Ittok… like mine… 
Back to the Cheap Seats for me…
2 Likes
Didn’t all Ittok tonearms have the separate arm rest?
2 Likes
And hence, a late Ittok looks very much like an Ekos…
My Ittok is much earlier - from 1982 - so has the original separate Arm Rest.
Linn make provision for this on the Kore Sub-Chassis (which surprised me) , by have a part drilled hole, for the original Arm Rest.
I wasn’t aware of that. There couldn’t have been that many of those manufactured or maybe they were soon superseded by the Ekos. I realise it’s all rather irrelevant now, but I wonder if there were any performance differences between LVII, LVIII and the first Ekos?
I always thought that the only black Ittoks were LVII but read a post recently where someone referred to a few black LVIIIs but don’t know if that’s correct, or if it extends to the final LVIII mark 2 as well (LVIII was in production for a few years but LVIII/2 is the only version with the built in arm rest and wasn’t available for long).
The original Ittok was available, at one stage, as either silver or black, IIRC.
An online search found me this history:
- Early Ittok - relatively narrow arm pillar and two-piece counterweight
- Later Ittok - big arm pillar and often a one-piece counterweight
- Ittok LVIII Mk 1 - glued arm tube but retaining a separate arm rest
- Ittok LVIII Mk 2 - Ekos style arm rest and smaller headshell
- Ekos Mk1 - some had dodgy bearings and may have been upgraded to Mk 2
- Ekos Mk2
Not sure how definitive this is… 
5 Likes
I think pretty spot on Ian from what I’ve researched also but who knows
I am aware no Ekos 1’s came into Australian according to my long suffering dealer due to dodgy bearings
Friend of mine has an Ittok but not sure which one I must investigate , sounds good though
Thanks for the info Ian
The Ekos 2 lifter changed at some point but not aware of any other changes and that certainly didnt make it a different version.
Anyone can find it… On the interwebzzzz… 
From what (little) I know, it seems broadly correct. My own early Ittok has a 2 piece Counterweight and the large (as current) Arm Pillar.
Well the reviewer Chris Frankland certainly thought so when the Ekos was reviewed in HiFi Review in November 1988.
Swanny, because of copyright I’d prefer if you paraphrased from the review rather than post a copy of it up on the forum. Thanks.
1 Like
OK, thanks Richard.
In CF’s 1988 review, using a Linn/Naim active 6-pack (and Linn Troika) he talked about a family resemblance in the sound signatures of the two arms, but recognised that the Ekos had “vast areas of improvement over the Ittok”. He felt the Ekos “improved beyond all recognition in terms of dynamics, separation and rhythmic integrity”, also noting the improved focus, especially in both frequency extremes.
He felt that the lift in performance of the Ekos over the Ittok more than justified the difference in price between the two arms.
I have to say that his comments pretty much match my own thoughts on the difference between the two when I changed from the Ittok LVII to Ekos 1.5 many years ago.
6 Likes
Going from Ittok LVII to Ekos I shortly after it was launched was one of the biggest upgrades I’ve made. The biggest improvement was the removal of that characteristic coarse, forward midrange the Ittok had. Bass reproduction and stereo imagery much improved as well.
5 Likes
I never noticed any “characteristic coarse, forward midrange” when I used an Ittok, but I haven’t had an Ittok for the last seven years, so I’m unable to check. At least you’re happy with the Ekos SE.
1 Like