Natural Sound

[hopkins]

Easy. Different goals and values, some say preferences and tastes.

How do you explain it?

Not to repeat myself, but… In light of the topic of your thread, it is easy to conceive that people having the same goals (and similar experience of live sound) could choose different systems because no system comes close to reproducing that experience of live sound (and this is where preferences for lesser evils come in to play).

Once you accept that, then what is the point of insisting on live music as a reference? You could simply state what you enjoy listening to.

 

[microstrip]

(...) I was curious about your claim that he never referred to live music (...)

Sorry, when did I claim it?

 

[PeterA]

Not to repeat myself, but… In light of the topic of your thread, it is easy to conceive that people having the same goals (and similar experience of live sound) could choose different systems because no system comes close to reproducing that experience of live sound (and this is where preferences for lesser evils come in to play).

Once you accept that, then what is the point of insisting on live music as a reference? You could simply state what you enjoy listening to.

I enjoy my system, and my enjoyment is based on how natural is the experience of listening to music in my room.

I think where we differ is accepting your premise that “no system comes close to reproducing the experience of live sound”. I simply don’t accept your premise based on my own experience listening to a few specific systems and live music. You might respond that it is a matter of degree, and to that I would agree.

 

[PeterA]

Sorry, when did I claim it?

You wrote this: “ In many of his (Lamm’s) interviews I have read he never addressed using live music as a reference.

 

[microstrip]

You wrote this: “ In many of his (Lamm’s) interviews I have read he never addressed using live music as a reference.

You are partially quoting. The sentence had a start:

" Vladimir Lamm called "natural" a type of amplified sound that followed a particular type of hearing mechanism of the human ear that he had studied and developed. In many of his interviews I have read he never addressed using live music as a reference."


For me it was clear , but thanks, I will edit to make it clear:
“ In many of his (Lamm’s) interviews I have read he never addressed using live music as his reference."

As I said many times, IMO using live music as reference is essentially a marketing claim, but can be helpful to develop individual preferences and can be gratifying to listeners.

 

[PeterA]

You are partially quoting. The sentence had a start:

" Vladimir Lamm called "natural" a type of amplified sound that followed a particular type of hearing mechanism of the human ear that he had studied and developed. In many of his interviews I have read he never addressed using live music as a reference."


For me it was clear , but thanks, I will edit to make it clear:
“ In many of his (Lamm’s) interviews I have read he never addressed using live music as his reference."

As I said many times, IMO using live music as reference is essentially a marketing claim, but can be helpful to develop individual preferences and can be gratifying to listeners.

Well, clearly you and I disagree on this topic. Tim, Al, Brad, I, and others all mention listening to live music as a reference and guide informing choices. And we are not trying to market anything.

Vladimir Lamm did clearly mention live music in his interviews. He may not have mentioned it as a guide for him during his design process and maybe that is what you mean, but he certainly mentioned the importance of listening to live music as a reference or guide for listeners when assessing audio gear. He clearly mentions it in the interview I quoted.

 

[tima]

" Vladimir Lamm called "natural" a type of amplified sound that followed a particular type of hearing mechanism of the human ear that he had studied and developed. In many of his interviews I have read he never addressed using live music as a reference."

There is more to the history of Vladimir Lamm's development process than what you read in interviews. That "particular type of hearing mechanism" that formed the basis of his designs was the human hearing mechanism reacting to live music.

Lamm used live music as a reference for creating his theories, for testing his theories, the models built on them and for the assessment of audio equipment. These facts are not marketing claims and if they are used as marketing claims it because they are true.

As Chief Design Engineer of Research and Development at the Lvov Radio & Electronics factory in the Soviet Union, Lamm had both the resources and large pools of test subjects for conducting hundreds of blind and double-blind listening experiments. From these he accumulated massive amounts of data about what happens when people hear certain sounds, including a complex sound like live music. With data in hand he used differential equations to develop scientific models that described mathematically what he calls "the human hearing mechanism." He converted those equations into electro-mechanical models and implemented them in specific circuit topologies.

Lamm then tested his circuit designs with hundreds of human listening subjects to demonstrate that, given human physiology, only a few combinations of audio circuitry will work for us as listeners. We cannot change how we perceive sound or music, even in the face of what passes for good specs. "As humans," Lamm observes, "we are created in a certain way. (This is what Ralph Karsten calls "the rules of human hearing".) We perceive sound on various levels: conscious as well as subconscious or intuitive. We perceive sound not just with our ears, but with the whole body." From his research he developed a set of theoretical ideals against which he evaluates any amplifier. He called these constructs the Absolute Linearity of a System -- a sort of unified field theory of amplifier design that explains how an amplifier should measure if it is to reproduce sound congruent with the way people naturally perceive it.

 

[microstrip]

There is more to the history of Vladimir Lamm's development process than what you read in interviews. That "particular type of hearing mechanism" that formed the basis of his designs was the human hearing mechanism reacting to live music.

Lamm used live music as a reference for creating his theories, for testing his theories, the models built on them and for the assessment of audio equipment. These facts are not marketing claims and if they are used as marketing claims it because they are true.

As Chief Design Engineer of Research and Development at the Lvov Radio & Electronics factory in the Soviet Union, Lamm had both the resources and large pools of test subjects for conducting hundreds of blind and double-blind listening experiments. From these he accumulated massive amounts of data about what happens when people hear certain sounds, including a complex sound like live music. With data in hand he used differential equations to develop scientific models that described mathematically what he calls "the human hearing mechanism." He converted those equations into electro-mechanical models and implemented them in specific circuit topologies.

Lamm then tested his circuit designs with hundreds of human listening subjects to demonstrate that, given human physiology, only a few combinations of audio circuitry will work for us as listeners. We cannot change how we perceive sound or music, even in the face of what passes for good specs. "As humans," Lamm observes, "we are created in a certain way. (This is what Ralph Karsten calls "the rules of human hearing".) We perceive sound on various levels: conscious as well as subconscious or intuitive. We perceive sound not just with our ears, but with the whole body." From his research he developed a set of theoretical ideals against which he evaluates any amplifier. He called these constructs the Absolute Linearity of a System -- a sort of unified field theory of amplifier design that explains how an amplifier should measure if it is to reproduce sound congruent with the way people naturally perceive it.

Yes, I have also read the articles in russian magazines and forums - google translator and a russian born native colleague helped me, as I referred in WBF when I researching Lamm, a few years ago. Unfortunately all I found are these nice sounding unconfirmed claims you now are repeating and nothing solid about his research.

I hope you are not comparing Ralph Karsten knowledgeable posts in WBF with such vague theories - and BTW, Ralph identified the published studies that were behind what he wrote and the models he refers, and they are nothing like what we are now addressing. I remember that as we properly knew what he was addressing we exchanged some interesting argumentative posts on it.

You have a point that we are just able to speculate on this whole subject - Vladimir Lamm intentionally avoided addressing any thing solid on the results of his research, except for marketing purposes. Unfortunately it seems that after his death this research is buried, and probably those who know about it want to keep is as such. Surely we must respect it.

 

[hopkins]

Yes, I have also read the articles in russian magazines and forums - google translator and a russian born native colleague helped me, as I referred in WBF when I researching Lamm, a few years ago. Unfortunately all I found are these nice sounding unconfirmed claims you now are repeating and nothing solid about his research.

I hope you are not comparing Ralph Karsten knowledgeable posts in WBF with such vague theories - and BTW, Ralph identified the published studies that were behind what he wrote and the models he refers, and they are nothing like what we are now addressing. I remember that as we properly knew what he was addressing we exchanged some interesting argumentative posts on it.

You have a point that we are just able to speculate on this whole subject - Vladimir Lamm intentionally avoided addressing any thing solid on the results of his research, except for marketing purposes. Unfortunately it seems that after his death this research is buried, and probably those who know about it want to keep is as such. Surely we must respect it.

I had a good laugh reading Tima’s post. This one is a real gem:

« These facts are not marketing claims and if they are used as marketing claims it because they are true. »

 

[PeterA]

The real measure of Vladimir Lamm’s research and knowledge is judged by the listener when hearing the sonic results he was able to achieve. And this can be recognized quickly.

 

[hopkins]

The real measure of Vladimir Lamm’s research and knowledge is judged by the listener when hearing the sonic results he was able to achieve. And this can be recognized quickly.

As always, the product should speak for itself.

I am all for understanding what makes the product unique - technically - but a little tired of reading the kind of platitudes stated in that post.

 

[tima]

I hope you are not comparing Ralph Karsten knowledgeable posts in WBF with such vague theories - and BTW, Ralph identified the published studies that were behind what he wrote and the models he refers, and they are nothing like what we are now addressing. I remember that as we properly knew what he was addressing we exchanged some interesting argumentative posts on it.

Over the years I've come to realize you are intractable and you simply can't help yourself in creating your responses.

I meant what I said, namely that both manufacturers have a view that human hearing works in certain ways and they design their equipment in accordance with what they beleve are the rules of human hearing. Lamm used hundreds of hours of testing and evaluation of human listeners to arrive at his conclusions. This is not some vague theory, as confirmed to me by Lamm himself. Karsten read other's work to come to conclusions along with his own experience as he has conveyed to me in private correspondence. You forget I have worked directly with both across five reviews -- there is no reason to misrepresent either. I encourage you to be less cavalier with other people's words.

 

[jeff1225]

The real measure of Vladimir Lamm’s research and knowledge is judged by the listener when hearing the sonic results he was able to achieve. And this can be recognized quickly.

He created a great circuit for his ML2 but did you know his solid state amps are simply a copy of a Mark Levinson circuit design with a tube in the output stage?

Lamm's "research" has never been published and is obviously no more thank marketing double speak.

 

[tima]

Lamm's "research" has never been published and is obviously no more thank marketing double speak.

If it has never been published how can you characterize it as double speak?

Lamm's research was done in Soviet Russia in a state owned factory. Perhaps you do not realize the disinclination of the state or industrials to give away proprietary information.

 

[jeff1225]

If it has never been published how can you characterize it as double speak?

Lamm's research was done in Soviet Russia in a state owned factory. Perhaps you do not realize the disinclination of the state or industrials to give away proprietary information.

At the end of the Soviet Union, there was a mass declassification of materials as archives and businesses were opened. This is how we know all of the intricacies of Stalin’s atrocities and the Chernobyl disaster. In terms of state owned factories, if they survived, they were privatized and proprietary information was available for pennies as capital was scarce.

Perhaps you’re not familiar with the fall of the Soviet Union.

 

[treitz3]

Two posts took this thread WAY off track.

Let's please get back to the thread topic....and stay there.

Tom

 

[jeff1225]

The Natural Sound thread is about Lamm, vintage horns, and DDK’s approach to audio.

How is discussing Lamm, his approach, and his research off track?

 

[treitz3]

At the end of the Soviet Union, there was a mass declassification of materials as archives and businesses were opened. This is how we know all of the intricacies of Stalin’s atrocities and the Chernobyl disaster. In terms of state owned factories, if they survived, they were privatized and proprietary information was available for pennies as capital was scarce.

Perhaps you’re not familiar with the fall of the Soviet Union.

Introducing political aspects. This has nothing to do with the research of any of the aforementioned, and it's also against the TOS of this forum.

Tom

 

[tima]

Two posts took this thread WAY off track.

Let's please get back to the thread topic....and stay there.

Tom

If it has never been published how can you characterize it as double speak?

Lamm's research was done in Soviet Russia in a state owned factory. Perhaps you do not realize the disinclination of the state or industrials to give away proprietary information.

If you refer to this post, Tom then I do not understand. i spoke to the issue at hand. I was questioning a post that erroneously described a factual description of V. Lamm's research as marketing double-speak. I saw that as an unfair attack on a manufacturer.

 

[PeterA]

He created a great circuit for his ML2 but did you know his solid state amps are simply a copy of a Mark Levinson circuit design with a tube in the output stage?

Lamm's "research" has never been published and is obviously no more thank marketing double speak.

No Jeff, I did not know that. Which Lamm and which Mark Levinson amps do you mean? I had the M1.1 hybrid driving my Magicos for a while and they sounded great. The few times I heard Mark Levinson amps, the systems sounded a bit dark.

You make it sound as though his designs could be easily copied. Are you aware of any other brand of amplifiers that sound similar enough to Lamm that they can be used as a substitute?

I do not know anything about Lamm’s research, and did not investigate before I bought his gear. I simply listened to his gear and heard something I liked.