| Search | Login/Register
   Home » Audio Discussions » Lamm introduced LL1 Signature Preamp… (20 posts, 1 page)
  Print Thread | 1st Post |  
Page 1 of 1 (20 items) Select Pages: 
   Target    Threads for related reading   Most recent post in related threads   Forum  Replies   Views   Started 
  »  New  Preamplifiers: keys to mystery. (Lamm L1, L2)..  In analog domain...  Audio Discussions  Forum     2  43130  11-14-2004
  »  New  HELP: I’m a line-level looser...  Further sonic humiliation....  Audio Discussions  Forum     22  110135  03-30-2005
  »  New  The ultimate buffer – light in the end of a tunnel..  Op Amps?...  Audio Discussions  Forum     33  256864  04-28-2005
  »  New  Lamm L1 vs. L2 preamp..  L1/L2 & Police Breathalyzer...  Audio Discussions  Forum     5  49928  06-25-2005
  »  New  Lamm Industries: a special interview with a special com..  I do not think so but I migh be wrong....  Audio News Forum     94  905621  09-18-2005
  »  New  Reviewing preamps by imbeciles...  More toilet reading about preamps......  Audio For Dummies ™  Forum     1  31132  06-25-2006
  »  New  The ultimate buffer #2...?..  invisible preamps...  Audio Discussions  Forum     3  29204  11-23-2006
  »  New  Lamm ML2.2 and Mark the BS teller...  Keeping beaching about Spectral…...  Audio Discussions  Forum     7  44670  01-30-2012
05-16-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,495
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 1
Post ID: 10521
Reply to: 10521
Lamm introduced LL1 Signature Preamp…
fiogf49gjkf0d

…and since it is in LL line I presume that it might be right along with LL2 Preamp – not particularly interesting preamp. In other words it is most likely the “positively expected” and “might be interesting” continuation of the L1 and L2 line.

As I understand the LL1 is one stage buffer with paralleled output tubes and all this costs $43K.

Again, I do not object the price but I question what is given for the price. 

http://www.lammindustries.com/PRODUCTS/LL1spec.html

http://www.lammindustries.com/PRODUCTS/LL1descr.html

The 17dB gain with Rated Output Voltage of 1V RMS? Am I missing anything?

Anyhow, a conventional PS with regulated filaments (very strange), no phase –switch, just 3 inputs (probably only one is “direct”), capacitor-coupled tube gain stage with 200R output impedance, no remote control, no phonostage… I do not know but I do not see a lot of send in all of it, but I also had a cold shoulder to LL1 ancestor - the LL2.

I hope Lamm is still working on L3 –the next preamp in the L1, L2 line. I hope it will have at least half dozen inputs, no idiotic tape loop, have a few options for RIAA inputs, have phase inversion options and the most important to have the distinctive X-factor impact to sound (unique phase processing) that L1/L2 had. I do not know how LL1 sound as if it employs any X-factor capacity but purely exploiting-wise it did not appear to me like anything that makes sense.  I hope it has transparent enough sound, but under some circumstance a $5 worth op-amp has transparent enough sound… Considering the most of the line-level preamps do not use gain I wonder in which direction the LL1 leads.

Thos manufacturers spray the trims for their models: Reference, Signature, Statement and etc… This one is Signature. I did not hear preamp it but from what I see in description it appears to me that it is a strange Signature…

Rgs, Romy the Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
10-14-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,495
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 2
Post ID: 11964
Reply to: 10521
Lamm LL1 vs. L1/L2
fiogf49gjkf0d
It six month as Lamm released his LL1 preamp but I do not see any “jitter” about the sound of the unit. Even the Lamms’ leash-driven, in-house bitches from Soundstage do not publish any “review”. I did not see even any talk online about LL1. This is very sad and it would be very interning if the LL1 has inherent the L1/L2’s “X-factor” that I describe in the “keys to mystery” article.  I still debating of the L1/L2’s “X-factor” was a lucky accident, sort of byproduct of the SS output stage that Vladimir used in  L1/L2 or it was well-intended quality of sophisticated and super smart phase processing. I think listing the LL1 shell answer this question as it has tube buffer.

I know that many people, even among those who used the L1/L2 for years, are still clueless about “X-factor”. It is normal, the accidental people are clueless. Still, I hope those who would buy/try the Lamm LL1 would speak out and they might inadvertently express something that I might interpret in the direction that I know. So, if anybody hear the Lamm LL1 or anything about the Lamm LL1’s sound then let me know.

The Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
10-15-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,495
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 3
Post ID: 11969
Reply to: 11964
The only one Lamm LL1 use and he turns to be an idiot!
fiogf49gjkf0d

A site visitor sent me a link to Oneobgyn playback at Audiogone as Oneobgyn uses Lamm LL1.

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr_memb.pl?vaslt&1049587927&memb&zzOneobgyn

Whatever Oneobgyn was expressing at Audiogone about LL1 was not useful but rather diagnosable, not to mention that he acts as a dealer.

Another visitor pointed out that Oneobgyn has own forum, where I just registered and proposed him to express not his typical ecstatic empty idiocy but to express some sings of lucid thinking about LL1. I had a number of specific questions that I was interested and that proposed him to answer.  The guy deleted my post and banned from his site.  I think it was a “huge” lost for me. I guess the real lost was on him as he lost the only opportunity for himself to learn and to understand something about the Lamm LL1 sound.

The Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
01-09-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,495
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 4
Post ID: 12652
Reply to: 11964
Lamm LL1 at CES-2010
fiogf49gjkf0d

Yes, it is a bit ridicules to have 4 boxes – a clearly money-raising project. Probably Lamm need to make it 2 chassis init with box #5 is to store manuals and box #6 to store the tube replacements. Talking about tube – one gain state with 4 paralleled Russian 6H30? I an not a huge fun to tube paralleling but Russian tubes that are notoriously difficult to match and to keep matched is shell be truly fun to maintain.

Lamm LL1 at CES 2010

4 parallel tubes with 200R output impedance and 4 inputs. Looks like cathode biased and capacitor coupled. The TKD stepped pots that I would question for best results and circuit board mount.  I do not know …

Looking on the back of the unit I do not truly under what Lamm did with outputs and why he devised into on two section – it a monoblock! So, a unit has 5 outputs, which is OK. For 5 outputs it shall have less then 200R output impedance but I guess it can ran a lot of current from those 200R. What kind people would need multiple out from preamps? Probably the people who run multi-amping, right? Was the ML3 made with objective of multi-amping? Yeh, you wish!

Anyhow, I do not like this preamp and I think it was just Lamm’s collection attempt from the people who uses his L2. If the LL1 has the positive quality of L1/L2 presentation is most like will not be known as a few people I know who owns the LL1 now are idiots and it is not clear how serious will be the future LL1 users. This LL1 vs. L1/L2 preservation of the X-factor that I described before is the only interesting factor to me in LL1. I do not see in LL1 any phase correction element but it might be very settled and not obvious to an ignorant observer.

Anyhow, I think the LL1 is proxy preams while Lamm will make the true needed a statement, preamp. The statement would have optimized stages, wit, on-board phonostage, 6-7 inputs, and sub 50R out impedance…  I wonder who would do it first – Lamm make his next full-function preamp or Guy Hummel would come up with his own RIAA add-in?
The Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
03-23-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,495
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 5
Post ID: 13221
Reply to: 10521
Mickelson’s write up about Lamm LL1 Preamplifier
fiogf49gjkf0d

I did not read it yet.

http://www.theaudiobeat.com/equipment/lamm_ll1_signature.htm

The Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
03-24-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Stitch


Behind The Sun
Posts 226
Joined on 01-15-2009

Post #: 6
Post ID: 13222
Reply to: 13221
Mono Chassis are unique or?
fiogf49gjkf0d
I had no chance to listen to his latest Designs (I know his L2R, LL2 preamps and the ML2.1..) but probably he wanted to realize his latest ideas (who knows) or he realized that in some parts of the world his existing units are simply too cheap compared to others. Most wealthy Audiophiles want an exclusive car in rack size :-), I think, those will havea new idea about spending their money... 


Kind Regards
Stitch
03-24-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,495
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 7
Post ID: 13223
Reply to: 13221
Vladimir Lamm reviews Mark Mickelson?
fiogf49gjkf0d
I did glance over the Mickelson’s articles and it amasses me to what level of arrogance those reviewing people are able to descent. The whole article is so remarkably about nothing that I even surprised that Lamm signed it off. (All “reviews” that this “journalist” does are approved and sighed off by manufacturers). In fact there is even one interesting moment in this article. This “review” is so saturated with bogus mistakes and ridicules self-contradictory statesman that I think that Lamm desired do not correct them in order to show to a thinking reader that the preamp was “reviewed” by an imbecile.  The idiocy of thoughts in the article is too obvious and I wonder why Vladimir did not correct them. Anyhow, the idea that in phase-inverted preamp a person need to “swap the positive and negative connections” at speaker was certainly brilliant. Not the less that the idea of the full-wave rectification becomes “complex and expensive way to implement a power supply”.  I think the next this that Mark Mickelson needs to “review” the audio fuses made from superconductive material…

I wonder if those people do not to tire from themselves? Do then have any shame to publish this crap?

The Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
03-24-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Stitch


Behind The Sun
Posts 226
Joined on 01-15-2009

Post #: 8
Post ID: 13224
Reply to: 13223
Times are tough, but modern!
fiogf49gjkf0d
 Romy the Cat wrote:
... to show to a thinking reader that the preamp was “reviewed” by an imbecile.  The idiocy of thoughts in the article is too obvious ...

The Cat

*Ahem*
A thinking Reader?
In the audiophile world of today??

Here is the earth a disc.


Kind Regards
Stitch
07-11-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,495
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 9
Post ID: 13975
Reply to: 10521
Another Lamm LL1 review.
fiogf49gjkf0d

It is amassing how a guy can so much talk and to say nothing. According him Lamm invented PS and Class A operation…

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/preamplifiers/854-lamm-ll1-signature-stereo-tube-preamplifier.html?showall=1

The review is idiotic but I wonder- why a gay with old BAT VK3 or VK5 was given to review LL1? BAT preamps are so far from Lamms that this JJ is obviously uninformed and not qualified. I would like at least a heavy L2 user to play with LL1….

The entire reviews praise LL1 for low amount of distortion with not feedback. JJ said: “Each one (driving stage) is a low impedance (800 ohms) dual triode, so basically here, you have eight triodes driving the signal.” OK, I wonder how eight triodes can be in driving sit if the unit is balanced. If all 4 tube are paralleled then what drives the other half of balanced circuit? Am I an  idiot or that JJ is an idiot?

The Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
07-12-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Stitch


Behind The Sun
Posts 226
Joined on 01-15-2009

Post #: 10
Post ID: 13976
Reply to: 13975
Reviews - Are they really that important?
fiogf49gjkf0d
Unfortunately this will be a rare unit based on price and I would love to listen to it. I know the L2R and LL2 and I was really impressed from the LL2.

A "review" today is always more or less the same writing. I can't imagine, that there is really someone out there who is willing to write the "truth". Whatever this is.

I spoke with some Importers about reviews in general and I was really amazed, that they aren't really interested in a top report. It is absolutely ok, when there are a few pages about something and no one can read something useful about it.

A review is important to potential customers who look for some information and when there is a review about it available, then it is fine.
I read a lot and compared a lot and in final I can say, those units which were horrible for me, got the same positive sentences in a review like those, which were really pushing the curtain.


Kind Regards
Stitch
07-12-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,495
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 11
Post ID: 13978
Reply to: 13976
Lammb vs. Camel.
fiogf49gjkf0d
It is not about a purpose or importance of a review. This guy set his review as some kind of topological exploration of LL1 operation. However, instead of it he copied the pages from Electronics for Beginners and said practically nothing that relates to the given preamp. How cool would it be if JJ would explore how Lamm maintains second harmonics and how the saturation of second harmonics at different volume level affects sound? You did not see in but what you see was a bunch of generic comments about irrelevant topologies and mistaken judgments about the operation of the given unit. With the same effect the guy could write an essay about proliferation of camels in sub-Sahara Africa and to call it “Lamm LL1 review”.

The Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
07-25-2014 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,495
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 12
Post ID: 21116
Reply to: 10521
Lamm LL1 preamps review by Robert Reina
fiogf49gjkf0d
It became customary that I make fan or blame in idiocy different industry reviewers, regrettably they give endless opportunely to do so by writing their incredibly stupid review. It also become customary that I follow what Lamm produces. I use to own many of Lamm products, love some of them and I do think that I have a good grip how they sound and function, so naturally I do pay attention to what Lamm does, even though I do not own any Lamm products. Lamm publish on his site a few days back a review by Robert Reina of his Lamm LL1 preamp.

http://www.lammindustries.com/reviews/LL1_Stereophile_Aug%202014.pdf

To a huge surprise of mine and very in contrary to the industry tradition Robert Reina did make an interesting and enlightening review. Not that I agree with all of his comments  and his metodological approaches but generally it is a very nice review.

Rgs, Romy


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
07-25-2014 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Paul S
San Diego, California, USA
Posts 2,130
Joined on 10-12-2006

Post #: 13
Post ID: 21118
Reply to: 21116
The Gold Standard for LF
fiogf49gjkf0d
Well, Stereophile did not trot out the big guns for Lamm, for a change. I can't find my copy of that issue right now, but one comment from Reina was that his bass standard is a recording of pop music that includes electric bass, synthesizer and laptop, or something equally dopy. OTOH, if nothing else, I guess they know their market...


Paul S
07-26-2014 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,495
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 14
Post ID: 21119
Reply to: 21118
What he wrote...
fiogf49gjkf0d
Paul, come on! I do not fell and did not say that Reina, or any other industry reviewer provided, or able to provide, any objective absolute judgment about this or that audio product. Reading their reviews is like practicing in revered engineering of differential diagnose and the only thing that one could hope is the reviewer to comply with own purpose and presumed limitations. What Robert Reina was accurate depicture of his experience and his experience was very constant in my view. I might engaged in debate about the absolute value his remarks but to do this I need to be intimately familiar with the product under discussion or some topological fundamentals that the product used. I never heard the preamp, have no idea how it was made and have no business to debate it. I do frequently insist in stupidity of absurdity of reviews regarding the products that I never heard but I always in those cased disagree not with conclusion but with methodology and inconstancy. In my view the Reina’s review above has not a lot of methodological inconsistencies. Again, not with everything I agree but I do feel that Reina honestly wrote about what he heard and what he understood from heard.


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
07-26-2014 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Stitch


Behind The Sun
Posts 226
Joined on 01-15-2009

Post #: 15
Post ID: 21120
Reply to: 21118
Lamm LL1 Signature
fiogf49gjkf0d
I listened to those some time ago. It was a full Lamm combo with ML3 + LP2 paired with Wilson Alexandria. This Doc from the WBF Forum never missed a second to tell the world how super this combination is. Above the holy grail. I found an owner with same Set Up and listened extensively to.

Well, this Doc is an idiot. A typical example that those guys swear that only enough big bucks will create a top sonic result....The M1.2R is a MUCH better match for this speaker, but, it is too cheap....The ML3 can drive the Alexandria but it is far away from a good, effortless reproduction combination and based on that I will be careful with my opinion about the LL1. I think, from what I heard, the LL1 is a good sounding preamp, but the price for 4 boxes with a lot of air inside is steep. When they read 95dB or something similar they all think, great, I can use tubes with that speaker. No one from these "experienced" morons waste any time what the signal will meet the X-over parts first .... and some are a black hole....
I listened to preamps which are more expensive and much more worse from a correct tone but my impression is, a LL2 with better parts (Poti, caps, connectors) can do the same. 



Lamm LL1  1.jpg




Lamm LL1  2.jpg




Kind Regards
Stitch
07-26-2014 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,495
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 16
Post ID: 21121
Reply to: 21120
A configuration...
fiogf49gjkf0d
 Stitch wrote:
I listened to those some time ago. It was a full Lamm combo with ML3 + LP2 paired with Wilson Alexandria. This Doc from the WBF Forum never missed a second to tell the world how super this combination is. Above the holy grail. I found an owner with same Set Up and listened extensively to.

Well, this Doc is an idiot. A typical example that those guys swear that only enough big bucks will create a top sonic result....The M1.2R is a MUCH better match for this speaker, but, it is too cheap....The ML3 can drive the Alexandria but it is far away from a good, effortless reproduction combination and based on that I will be careful with my opinion about the LL1. I think, from what I heard, the LL1 is a good sounding preamp, but the price for 4 boxes with a lot of air inside is steep. When they read 95dB or something similar they all think, great, I can use tubes with that speaker. No one from these "experienced" morons waste any time what the signal will meet the X-over parts first .... and some are a black hole....

I listened to preamps which are more expensive and much more worse from a correct tone but my impression is, a LL2 with better parts (Poti, caps, connectors) can do the same. 

Well, I always felt that the only way to BEGIN tojudge a preamp is to do a bypass test in unity gain

http://www.goodsoundclub.com/Forums/ShowPost.aspx?PageIndex=1&postID=2589 

…but I do not think that an industry person or a person who have spent 40K for the unit would have guts to do it. It is no question that Lamm holds his customers a money milking hostages, coming up with multiple chassis and other completely superficial things.  The idiots from WBF forum are very much his level clientele and he and they patronize each other. If you do not like it then you have no business to be in THE business.

I do presume that LL1 is an OK sounding preamp but Lamm is known for perfectly able to compromise own products when it was not necessary. Only Lamm can make hugely expensive 4353 chassis LP1 phonostage and to ship it with incredibly shitty, build-in step-up transformer that make the unit not suitable for MC operation. In LL2 we have multiple cathodes (?!) outputting cup-coupled 200R behind numerous switches and space-spread printed board layout. I do not know if this is an “ultimate” configuration.


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
07-27-2014 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Stitch


Behind The Sun
Posts 226
Joined on 01-15-2009

Post #: 17
Post ID: 21122
Reply to: 21121
The secrets of Lamm X-factor
fiogf49gjkf0d
 Romy the Cat wrote:

Briefly: a spatial expander is a mechanism of artificially creates spacious more sound. A spatial expander does not generate more realistic sound, but more pleasant sound. The spatial effects are accomplished by mixing into each channel an inverted crossfeed signal from the opposite channel to vary the presence of the mono signal. The effect widens the soundstage, create a separation between the instruments, “inverts” tones by injecting into them a small particulates of own out-of-phaseiness and has some other subjectively pleasing effects. The tradeoff is reduced focus and loss of bass, because bass signals tend to be monaural.

So, if you add to the spatial expander’s characteristics the L1-L2 this dally degrading transients capacity and dally incising dynamic compression due to the faulty designed powers supply (unless you are wiling to change the tubes in there weekly and I suggest above) then you have a have very clear depicture of the L1/L2. A couple days ago when I was contemplation it I had a conversation withy a guy that I know to whom I shared my views about the spatial expander and Lamm SS preamps. After listing me he said proposed that in such case the L1/L2 should perform better and be more transparent in bass region if it switched in mono. He, owning the L1 and L2 did report that it was his observation in past that mono music sounds better on Lamm’s preamp. It was very promising.  Today the same guy went to a listening room of another person who has cruelly L1 with mono switch bult-in and they made an experiment playing music and flipping the mono switch. The reported that bass become much better in mono setting… the way how it should be in case the spatial expander was used.

Well, it looks like the secret of the X-factor is resolved.  Unquestionably it was very good Lamm’s intention with L1 and L2 but unfortunately it was not implemented at the level of the serious listeners might demand. I wonder if would be possible to replicate that X factor  (sponsored by the spatial expander effect) only at the more demanding level?

Rgs,
Romy the Cat



Probably that's the background to go for a 2 x mono Preamp 




Kind Regards
Stitch
07-27-2014 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
steverino
Posts 296
Joined on 05-23-2009

Post #: 18
Post ID: 21123
Reply to: 13978
Reina
fiogf49gjkf0d
i believe Reina has a completely different rather normal day job and does audio writing for a hobby. I agree that Reina does not do the intentional BS kind of review. He does tend to favor less costly gear (or did  years ago when I still glanced at Stereophile), so it is interesting that they had him review this unwieldy and expensive setup. Maybe they took a private customer opinion poll of their reviewers and found that only Reina has a bit of credibility with their remaining customers. That being said I certainly would not trust his ears for my own purchases. Anyway I think linestage quality has been improving better than other audio components so I don't think people need to overspend for that particular component anymore.
07-27-2014 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,495
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 19
Post ID: 21124
Reply to: 21122
I do not buy it.
fiogf49gjkf0d
 Stitch wrote:
Probably that's the background to go for a 2 x mono Preamp 

Hm, that is want “common sense” suggests being but I do not subscibe it. Fist is because the X-factor is not Lamm’s commodity, unfortunately. None of the Lamm’s customers with exception of literally handful individuals even inform or acknowledge the existence of X-factor in earlier Lamm’s preamps. So, there was no reason for Lamm to go for it. Not the last factor that it never was “reviewed”, means sold as an article of trade. Second. The later after L2 Lamm’s preamps did not have any X-factor, wich made me to suspect that it was some kind of exclusive property of SS design of the earlier units. Third. The max effect of X-factor I observed at very fist Lamm’s preamp – the L1, which was a single box unit. And the last – I do not buy Lamm’s reasoning of vintage 2013. From what I observe in him during the last 10 years is what I see in any other For Profit Corporation – a profit maximization  - and if they can cut any imaginable corner go away with it then they will certainly go for it.


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
08-31-2017 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,495
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 20
Post ID: 23379
Reply to: 10521
An Oscar for the most retarded comment printed in audio media?
I need to say that I have no time or franc lay speaking interests to read audio reviews. The unfortunate truth is that when I do sometimes I need to re-read the same paragraph 2-3 times to understand what I was reading. I am not damn and do read fast and understand very well. In past I even had a phenomenal memory and I was able to memories pages of text with no even needs to do it.  Nowadays at 49 I cannot memories as well it but I still feel that I have good cerebral skills to read and understand printed text. However, I do not understand the last good 10 years the audio reviews. I read sentences but I do not get what the words mean. Perhaps I am an idiot.


Anyhow, Marshall Nack printed in PF his new review about Lamm LL1.1 Signature Dual-Mono Preamplifier. I read it 3 times, I do not understand what he is saying. It is juts some kind of fucking audio Esperanto that I do not get meaning.  What I did get in there were two factual errors that stood too conspicuous.
 
First was Mr. Nack’s comment about Lamm. According to him Vladimir Lamm said: "That is why we are talking to each other, because you like sounds. And I have zero aptitude for them. My brain is suited for numbers and circuit design." This is absolute not accurate. Perhaps Lamm was trying to appear to Marshall as some kind of marketing genius who know how to impress a stupid reviewer as he was a brain with only number in his head. Or perhaps Mr. Nack’s just invented the whole story. The reality is that Vladimir is perfectly balanced person, at least was 17 years back, with very healthy interest in Sound and with a good aptitude to rationalize Sound by numbers and circuit design. I need to note that I do not buy the stories that Lamm spread among the writing idiots that he does not listen his designs and use only “invented by him theory of how audio should be made”. Anyhow, the quotes that Mr. Nack’s attributed to Vladimir were pure BS, would it be coming from Lamm himself or it was invented by Marshall.


The second BS is brilliant.  Mr. Nack wrote: “Please note: The LL1.1 employs a single gain stage, hence it inverts the signal. That means you'll need to swap the plus and minus speaker cables at one set of binding posts.” Really!!! Mr. Nack, do you really understand what kind crap you wrote?  Do Positive Feedback editors read this crap before they publish it? Besides the ridicules presumption that inverted component need to invert binding posts fildMarshall-idiot advises to do it at “one set of binding posts”. Can this guy to get some kind Oscar for the most retarded comment printed in audio media?


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Page 1 of 1 (20 items) Select Pages: 
   Target    Threads for related reading   Most recent post in related threads   Forum  Replies   Views   Started 
  »  New  Preamplifiers: keys to mystery. (Lamm L1, L2)..  In analog domain...  Audio Discussions  Forum     2  43130  11-14-2004
  »  New  HELP: I’m a line-level looser...  Further sonic humiliation....  Audio Discussions  Forum     22  110135  03-30-2005
  »  New  The ultimate buffer – light in the end of a tunnel..  Op Amps?...  Audio Discussions  Forum     33  256864  04-28-2005
  »  New  Lamm L1 vs. L2 preamp..  L1/L2 & Police Breathalyzer...  Audio Discussions  Forum     5  49928  06-25-2005
  »  New  Lamm Industries: a special interview with a special com..  I do not think so but I migh be wrong....  Audio News Forum     94  905621  09-18-2005
  »  New  Reviewing preamps by imbeciles...  More toilet reading about preamps......  Audio For Dummies ™  Forum     1  31132  06-25-2006
  »  New  The ultimate buffer #2...?..  invisible preamps...  Audio Discussions  Forum     3  29204  11-23-2006
  »  New  Lamm ML2.2 and Mark the BS teller...  Keeping beaching about Spectral…...  Audio Discussions  Forum     7  44670  01-30-2012
Home Page  |  Last 24Hours  | Search  |  SiteMap  | Questions or Problems | Copyright Note
The content of all messages within the Forums Copyright © by authors of the posts