Will Origin Live Conqueror tonearm fit my Rega RP10's skeletal plinth?


I'm considering replacing the RB-2000 tonearm on my Rega RP10 (circa 2014 - 2016) with an Origin Live (OL) model, probably the Conqueror MK4, and all indications are the hole diameter for the 3-point mount should be identical, but I am concerned that my RP10's skeletal plinth may be too small near the base of the tonearm for the OL's oval or triangular "plate" or "frame" that appears in photos above and around the mount base (where the Rega arm has its bias force adjuster.)  If anyone on Audiogon has the Conqueror tonearm, could you take measurements of that part and respond?  Additionally, if you have the Rega RP10 table and have replaced the RB-2000 with an Origin Live arm, could you provide your experiences?  I'd appreciate it!  Mounting should not be a problem if the base is small enough to fit the plinth. The weight differences between the Rega and OL arms are within a pound or so and I expect the plinth can handle that. 

Thanks!

 

lgo-jerry
rauliruegas. I respect Michael Fremer and his opinions greatly, regardless of which magazine has published his reviews. Having said that, Stereophile presents annual reports of what they consider the best of any components that they have reviewed. I have never seen the Rega RB-2000 or the newer RB-3000 rated as a recommended tonearm, although I have seen both the RP10 and P10 turntables with tonearms mounted recommended as packages. When I’ve looked for tonearm reviews or recommendations, I’ve never found the RB-2000 or RB-3000 mentioned. One sees Kuzma, Graham, Reed, and a dozen or so other tonearm manufacturer’s products reviewed and recommended but very little Rega unless it is a Rega-based tonearm that has been heavily modified by another manufacturer. When I’ve researched tonearms outside of magazines via the internet, I’ve found reviews of many brands, but again, hardly anything about Rega tonearms except for Rega’s own advertising. So, this had led me to believe that either Rega is not considered a higher performance tonearm worthy of recommendation or reviewers simply don’t find Rega tonearms interesting enough to review. Too often magazine reviewers of Rega Products seem to quote Rega’s advertising as if they’ve no words to describe their own experience with the products, and that makes it difficult for a consumer to make an informed decision. It becomes a matter of whom one believes. I am more inclined to believe the word of a consumer that has lived with a product that I am to believe the manufacturer's sales organization.

I am a long term absentee from having listened to anything Rega, even though I am quite familiar with Tonearms based on their design, but more importantly Tonearms that have adopted their geometry.

I own a Audiomods Series V Mictometer and a SME IV, each is much of a muchness in how the music is presented, which in a assessment today is referring  to by myself as a noticeably constrained mechanical function.

I am also not too distanced from being quite familiar with the SME V, through receiving demo's of it in use in another system. These demo's have the outcome, where I have developed the same assessment, that the V is similar to the IV, being able to create the impression of being constrained.

 The V owner moved on to a different non SME Model TT and commenced using OL Tonearms.

I am as a result of the V owners transition to OL, become familiar with the OL Encounter, Illustrious in use with a Sumiko Pearwood and have missed out on the Conqueror.

I have formed the viewpoint the OL Models I have now experienced in use, have proven for my own listening purposes, to be a much more attractive Tonearm than the other Tonearms referred to above. 

Note: Using the recollections from my experiencing the impact made on myself, of the differing Tonearms, the OL Models are the ones that are presenting in a manner that does not enforce the concept there is a constraint to the mechanical function.

The Company may have done more work to the mechanical interfaces, with the intention of producing their own voicing for their models? Or maybe not? 

Note: The owner of the OL Arms has now moved on to a used model Vertere MG TT, and the HiFi Group I am a member of, has made it known,  they sense the OL Conqueror might prove to be the better arm to be be in use on the MG TT.            

Thanks, Pindac.  I think I understand what you mean regarding constraints on the sound. I've made several changes in associated components over the past two years and every new addition has made a definite improvement.  I've bought much better phonostage, amplifier, cables, cartridge...All while using the RP10 with its stock RB-2000 tonearm. I can't say whether there would be further improvement by using a "better" tonearm, but it would seem to be the logical next step.  Then again, simply because each change improved the sound while using the same table and tonearm, perhaps that means more improvements can be had without upgrading the tonearm. If HiFi equipment was less expensive it would be easier to find out! 

@lgo-jerry I am no longer using the Audiomods or SME IV.

My comments about constrained are strictly related to my assessment of the mechanical function, there is a occasion when the TT and Cart' have been the same to evaluate the Tonearms in use.

I have formed this assessment as there is a comparison carried out on a few occasions to another owned Tonearm, that I now have in use as the main arm.

Once the perceived constraint is detected, it sticks like a coloration one is sensitive to. For me it become as noticeable as a overbearing Metal Tweeter, but not as assaulting to the ears.

I also loaned the IV out to a HiFi Group Member in the market for a Tonearm to be used with their SP10 R. They did not get the impression the SME IV was right for them, and purchased a Glanz 12" Arm. 

I have become very familiar with the Glanz arm in use with both Japanese and Scandinavian Origin Cart's attached and can assure that the SP10 R > Glanz are a very very attractive marriage. 

I will also say for my sensitivities, the Glanz, is a good few steps ahead of the OL arms, where perception of freedom and not being constrained is under the microscope.

I am suggesting mechanical interfaces are the cause of the perceived constraint and taking a time out, to learn more about Tonearms that are not creating the type of constraint I am referring to, can't do any harm. If you discover similar to which I have from a particular model of Tonearm, this Tonearm, 'if selected as a exchange arm', will bring a new level of insight to how a recording can produce a sonic.

The recent investments made on the other supporting ancillaries should really allow them to shine, with their processing the source signal that is now capable of being produced. 

 

"I've bought much better phonostage, amplifier, cables, cartridge...All while using the RP10 with its stock RB-2000 tonearm. I can't say whether there would be further improvement by using a "better" tonearm, but it would seem to be the logical next step.

Since you have that base covered, I would consider myself good until you're ready to commit to the next level-significant outlay for a completely new setup. 

"Better" phonostage in your case means something $3-5K and capable of exploiting a $3K+ cartridge.

I would consider myself set until I'm ready to open the wallet considerably wider for a completely new setup. Dump the RP10 for a Kuzma, Feikert or whatever.