• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

rigb body for 540ml

narud

Active Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2023
Messages
103
Likes
99
so i came across this video
comparing the 540ml with the plastic body vs the rigb. i didnt watch any of it, but just went straight to the downloads. i wasnt expecting a difference, but after looking at them with curve eq, the rigb body clips show around a 3db reduction in the highs compared to the stock body. would something like this be a better (albeit more expensive) or worse alternative to changing the loading?
 
Can anyone show the spectrum/curve if it is not the same body and stylus it can be a sample variation . I do nit understand why a body could change frequency response LowBrats.de measured the AT series and 540 was better than 740
 
so i came across this video
comparing the 540ml with the plastic body vs the rigb. i didnt watch any of it, but just went straight to the downloads. i wasnt expecting a difference, but after looking at them with curve eq, the rigb body clips show around a 3db reduction in the highs compared to the stock body. would something like this be a better (albeit more expensive) or worse alternative to changing the loading?
Why do these guys never Get to the point,..using a million Words , so I gave up
 
Just don't understand the ongoing vinyl setup thing for the most part....I have a lot of vinyl and gear to use it with but rarely even give it a second thought as to whether it's "audiophool" level
 
Why do people tinker with old cars, bikes, skies, wooden boats, sailboats etc?
 
i guess i should have watched some of the video. i didnt catch that he bought two cartridges.
heres what the two carts look like anyway
rigb is demo a.jpg

rigb is demo b.jpg
 
I do not know if it is the same cart or not , the youtuber never got to the point,
Which one is RigB?

540 in plastic has a nicer frequency response than the metal 740..,
 
Last edited:
I do not know if it is the same cart or not , the youtuber never got to the point,
Which one is RigB?

540 in plastic has a nicer frequency response than the metal 740..,
i skimmed through it and he eventually says he bought both a stock cart and a rigb modded cart. in the first pic above, the rig b is demo a. in the second pic, the rig b is demo b.
 
Can anyone show the spectrum/curve if it is not the same body and stylus it can be a sample variation . I do nit understand why a body could change frequency response LowBrats.de measured the AT series and 540 was better than 740
The Lowbeats test was interesting as I believe they used the same stylus assembly swapped between bodies. They also used a resonance-inert top Rega tonearm too, which kind-of contradicts my comments below... The 740 wasn't as 'brightly lit' up top by a couple of dB, but the 11khz or so 'peak' was reduced. You need to access the German pages, not the English language ones, although once the language is set for English, they can easily be read.



Linn did two versions of their AT93/95 based body mount, a plastic one in the K5 and a metallic one in the K9. I was pee-taked to hell and back for suggesting the K9 stylus (a Vital elliptical) sounded better and less 'messy' than it did in its own metal-mount body, but then, the final K9's were sold with K5 plastic mount bodies, so what do Ii know :D

Anecdotal with no objective proof, but pickups I have here with metal mounting, don't upset my Dual 701 tonearm when cueing/handling - it's a lively arm and some pickups 'sound' almost microphonic when I handle the arm to cue up - the otherwise delightful vintage half-inch mount B&O SP12 is awful for this. I wonder if this AT add-on actually helps to refine and restrain the 540 and previous 440 excesses and maybe not upset some popular lively tonearm designs? Someone will have to do an arm resonance test at high frequencies with the two mounting types to see.

Having said the above, to claim that this mount is 'better sounding' than the AT 700 type is a bit disingenuous maybe, especially when not one iota of objective testing is done to find out *why* it may be better.. I'd certainly consider one for my AT120E (body is the same I believe to all the new 500/700 models), but I have other priorities currently and feel my own rig would benefit from the slightly less 'assertive' tones of the VM740 over the far cheaper VM540 (jury's still out on that view though)

From Lowbeats, the 540 response (they do other tests as well)

1720518114653.png

The 740 in comparison -

1720518178901.png
 
Last edited:
2.5db drop in the presence region combined with 60+ years hearing would make the 740 quite dull for me I guess, 540 would suit my ears better. But I do not hear a massive difference in the KlangOrakel examples. But enough to not spent money on a 740 or RIGB. Maybe the 740 has a suspension issue.. ?
 
This settled it for me—I don’t think I’ll swap the plastic VM540 body for an aftermarket metal mount. Comparing the frequency response graphs, I feel I’d prefer the more neutral curve of the plastic body over the slight dip between 1-6kHz with the metal shell. That said, with my 43-year-old musician’s ears, I probably wouldn’t notice much of a difference or justify the effort and expense involved.
I will note that the stock tonearm on my Dual 721 can be a bit microphonic, and a metal shell might help reduce that. However, I haven’t experienced any issues or noticed weird harmonics. I am, however, very interested in the VM750 and AT-OC9XML. Thanks for this fantastic thread!
 
Back
Top Bottom