ying and yang--Lamm ML3 and darTZeel 458

[andromedaaudio]

I think im gonna go for headphones NO room NO big Amps NO Neighbours. NO Trouble with women, lol

 

[Mike Lavigne]

rainy Sunday afternoon with the ML3's and Beethoven Late Quartets.

between traveling on business three out of the last four weeks, having Ron Resnick visit last week, and just life intruding, I've not had much free listening time lately. yesterday I had 2 sets of listening visitors, the early set started off with the dart 458's at about 2pm, then the later visitor is the local Lamm dealer who I invited to hear the ML3's as he had not previously (he was blown away). so about 5pm I switched to the ML3's and we listened until after 10:30pm last night. during our session I did throw on a couple of String Quartets and as you might expect, the ML3's knocked them out of the park. then and there I decided today will be a large dose of concentrated String Quartet listening since the ML3's are already que'd up.

it rained like heck all day yesterday, and it's pouring again today, and really that is perfect compliment to the Quartetto Italiano Late Beethoven Quartet's box set on Philips #6707 031-4 discs.

really, really fine sounding. alive and here in the room in the best sense. the music reaches out and touches me, and so much life and energy. the ML3's were made for this music. I've listened to three sides so far and it's perfect. just the music and me. next up is the 'Quatour Vegh' Bartok Quartets Valois box set.

 

[Folsom]

Nice, I recall that album! Loved it.

 

[PeterA]

the credibility of my perceptions about these amps continue to be marginalized by people questioning my system compatibility and synergy. and I see it exactly the opposite. I feel you will never hear the ML3's sound better than how they sound in my system. and the same with the big VAC's.

only that for all music I prefer the darts.

how would you interpret these comments?



I've already said for certain music I prefer the ML3's. it's musical truth I'm after, not an amp topography.

as far as 'testy', my tolerance appetite likely abandoned me at about the 1100 post point.

Mike, I've read about three systems with the ML3s: yours, Steve's, and David's. You describe the ML3s as starting to run out of power on the most demanding music at loud volumes in your system, and that the Darts do not have this issue. I have not read of that complaint about the ML3s in either Steve's or David's system. Is it possible that the ML3s do not run out of power on the most demanding music at loud volumes in their systems, or do you really feel strongly that these amps sound the best they possibly can only in your own system?

EDIT: Having read more of the thread, I now see that you have addressed this issue and that your statement is not one of fact, but only a feeling on your part. I am still curious to know though, if the ML3s run out of power under any circumstances in those other systems.

 

[jeff1225]

Mike, I've read about three systems with the ML3s: yours, Steve's, and David's. You describe the ML3s as starting to run out of power on the most demanding music at loud volumes in your system, and that the Darts do not have this issue. I have not read of that complaint about the ML3s in either Steve's or David's system. Is it possible that the ML3s do not run out of power on the most demanding music at loud volumes in their systems, or do you really feel strongly that these amps sound the best they possibly can only in your own system?

EDIT: Having read more of the thread, I now see that you have addressed this issue and that your statement is not one of fact, but only a feeling on your part. I am still curious to know though, if the ML3s run out of power under any circumstances in those other systems.

They are SET amps that are just 32 WATTS. Of course they run out of steam on a system that is not ultra efficient in a large room. Steve has ported speakers in a small room and David has ultra efficient speakers.

Seriously it's apples, to oranges, to bananas.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Mike, I've read about three systems with the ML3s: yours, Steve's, and David's. You describe the ML3s as starting to run out of power on the most demanding music at loud volumes in your system, and that the Darts do not have this issue. I have not read of that complaint about the ML3s in either Steve's or David's system. Is it possible that the ML3s do not run out of power on the most demanding music at loud volumes in their systems, or do you really feel strongly that these amps sound the best they possibly can only in your own system?

EDIT: Having read more of the thread, I now see that you have addressed this issue and that your statement is not one of fact, but only a feeling on your part. I am still curious to know though, if the ML3s run out of power under any circumstances in those other systems.

for sure there is no dynamic limitations in David's system at all, in fact it's remarkably immediate and dynamic......as one would expect with 32 watts on horns. maybe the most immediate sounding system I've heard. not sure how efficient those horns are but at least 105 db if not higher. whether his system is set up to do large scale music I cannot say as he never played any. it was vocals and jazz mostly. likely there would not be any power issue, more whether the horns can stay together with large orchestral music. maybe they do that fine, but I've not heard horns do that. i do prefer the more full range ML3 approach (my opinion only) of my system to live with every day but there are aspects of David's ML3's that are superior. i just prefer the presentation of my system compared to David's. maybe if i lived with David's system for a month my opinion might change. it's a very different presentation than i'm use to.

i think with Steve it's really mostly preferring my own system to his, as he likely prefers his own. objectively the ML3's have an easier load both in speaker efficiency and less deep frequencies to power in my system.

They are SET amps that are just 32 WATTS. Of course they run out of steam on a system that is not ultra efficient in a large room. Steve has ported speakers in a small room and David has ultra efficient speakers.

Seriously it's apples, to oranges, to bananas.

i agree to a point. it does all come down to personal preferences. and the ML3's do sound different in each room. i simply prefer what the ML3's do in my system.

as far as ported bass in Steve's system, my system has integrated active powered bass below 40hz.

i guess my intentions from saying that the ML3's in my room, sound the best I've heard them, is that i love how they sound in my system, not really trying to knock how they sound in other systems. but i do realize that is a logical conclusion. and it could just be as simple as spending the time with them. i might not have fully appreciated what they did in those other systems.

 

[Folsom]

Would it be interesting to see how the LM3's did with a different preamp and the MM7's? And I don't mean for SQ, I just mean to see if 32w could go any farther. A bit of gain might get a bit farther. The NHB-18NS has slightly less than 0db gain.

 

[analogsa]

The NHB-18NS has slightly less than 0db gain.

And this amazing news came from where? I will not even comment the speculation that "32w could go any farther" with additional voltage gain. "Farther" into clipping?

 

[gian60]

Congrats Ron for your report on Monoandstereo on Mike's system

I already wrote before you are becoming a top hifi reporter

 

[Tango]

Dear Mike,

Big Congratulation to you. This is another testimony of how world class system your system is. With all the efforts you have poured into this system and room, I am really happy for you. What an achievement!! If I were you this would be a much greater satisfaction than sellinga record high Honda’s.

Best regards,
Tang

 

[microstrip]

Thanks Ron and Mike - the Mono and Stereo article is really a very enjoyable report, that raises more questions than answers!

 

[bonzo75]

Great write up as usual Ron. Totally agree with "This visit taught me that Mike has been more correct, and many others have been more incorrect, than I previously assumed."

Where we differ is I think it does the limited purposes stuff better than the limited purposes system too. There are some horn systems which could do the limited purposes things differently but hard to say better.

The only issue with Mike's system compared to these other systems is that you can attribute the positives to the components in the other systems while you can't take Mike out of his system.

 

[spiritofmusic]

Great write up Ron, you really got to the heart of things. Re the need for something close to ideal acoustics, I’d always been skeptical. But when you hear it finally, yr own system in a vastly improved room, everything suddenly makes sense. That’s me, I’m a total convert. Mike has ground up got the ideal blank canvas/open window to the world.
Maybe one of the reasons you really liked my digital here in Norfolk was the fact that the room really allowed the music to breathe, and the whole experience was so much less prone to artefacts? You should have listened to some digital at his.

 

[PeterA]

Great write up as usual Ron. Totally agree with "This visit taught me that Mike has been more correct, and many others have been more incorrect, than I previously assumed."

This is a very interesting comment from Ron. He seems to have gone into the visit with an open mind and hearing the system overturned some of his previous assumptions. I have to now agree with Marc that it is a shame that during the two long days that Ron did not atleast listen to one hour of digital. I understand the purpose of the visit was to hear top level vinyl and to compare the three amps, but listening to just a bit of digital might have overturned another strongly held assumption. I have completely changed my opinion of digital in the last year or so. I still prefer vinyl, but I can now listen to digital and enjoy it.

I look forward to reading Ron's write up on Mono and Stereo.

 

[bonzo75]

Peter, I went to the west coast to listen to another system, the visit to Seattle was secondary as I had preconceived notions it would be sterile state. All previous assumptions overturned.

 

[spiritofmusic]

Peter, now THAT would have been something, perhaps not so far fetched based on Ron really approving of my digital when he visited. Of course, now my analog is back up again...

 

[PeterA]

Peter, I went to the west coast to listen to another system, the visit to Seattle was secondary as I had preconceived notions it would be sterile state. All previous assumptions overturned.

Yes, you have stated that before, and I am not at all surprised. I followed Mike's system evolution for years on Audiogon and now here on WBF, and it is clear that years and much effort have gone into sorting it out. I strongly suspect that it shatters some strongly held audiophile beliefs, one of which is that SS is sterile sounding. But remember, not everyone feels that way about SS, especially Class A SS. I am a big supporter of "sweating the details". It is clear to me that Mike is as well.

 

[bonzo75]

Yes, you have stated that before, and I am not at all surprised. I followed Mike's system evolution for years on Audiogon and now here on WBF, and it is clear that years and much effort have gone into sorting it out. I strongly suspect that it shatters some strongly held audiophile beliefs, one of which is that SS is sterile sounding. But remember, not everyone feels that way about SS, especially Class A SS. I am a big supporter of "sweating the details". It is clear to me that Mike is as well.

Well I am trying to broad brush what I want to say. I actually like a lot of SS systems, in fact, horns aside, my favorite systems are all SS. But there is a whole aspect of other things and an approach that far exceeds what other systems prepared me for, to the point that all learning is reset. Before I visited him I could not relate to what he said, as he could have been another guy just defending his expensive purchases - there are many here who did that. That's the reason you find some people on the forum skeptical of what he says, I was there too.

 

[spiritofmusic]

I visited a fellow about a year ago who had spent big on the room - hidden acoustic panels, treated ceiling, bespoke power, and a system theoretically to die for. You could tell from the first bars of music that air and transparency and imaging were off the scale, a totally engaging early impression.
However it became apparent that the tone was cold, timbre was the same song to song, and an overwhelming sense of sterility imposed itself on every recording.
This was a good example of a (near) perfect room highlighting the poor choice of components.
Some may have felt this sound was neutral, it was blindingly fast and dynamic - I found it coloured in the extreme.
Interesting that I’ve heard since the demo, amps and source components have been dramatically changed. I guess the room truly was a lie detector/revealing mirror in this respect.

 

[microstrip]

I visited a fellow about a year ago who had spent big on the room - hidden acoustic panels, treated ceiling, bespoke power, and a system theoretically to die for. You could tell from the first bars of music that air and transparency and imaging were off the scale, a totally engaging early impression.
However it became apparent that the tone was cold, timbre was the same song to song, and an overwhelming sense of sterility imposed itself on every recording.
This was a good example of a (near) perfect room highlighting the poor choice of components.
Some may have felt this sound was neutral, it was blindingly fast and dynamic - I found it coloured in the extreme.
Interesting that I’ve heard since the demo, amps and source components have been dramatically changed. I guess the room truly was a lie detector/revealing mirror in this respect.

If you never listened to the room playing decently, how can you be sure the fault was with the equipment and not with the room? I have seen treated rooms that created exactly the problems you refer.