Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site


In the Forum: Audio For Dummies ™
In the Thread: Why I do not like the "high-end" audio-reviewers.
Post Subject: A natural sound gizmo.Posted by Romy the Cat on: 12/27/2024
 PeterA wrote:
One area in which I agree with Romy is that natural sound begins with the Lamm ML2.  David Karmeli and Vladimir Lamm were listening to the ML2 and David heard something magical. He asked Vladimir what it was and he said “that is natural sound”.  At some point, David asked Vladimir what speakers are best for the ML2 and Vladimir said an early version of the Vitavox CN191.  It is an exceedingly rare and unique combination.  The S2 driver is not enough. That specific corner horn cabinet and bass driver is part of the magic. Combined with a source that can extract all the information in those precious record grooves and not corrupt it, one is left with a natural presentation of music in the listening room.  The active search and choice and set up of this gear is an act of expression.  It is not a cowering in the corner while pleading “don’t hurt me”.  Romy‘s interpretation of natural sound is not correct.  It is not merely a rejection of the audio file glossary of terms or what he calls “the absolute sound“.   It is a celebration of using one’s knowledge and experience to assemble an audio system to create a listening experience at home, which reminds him of the experience of listening to live music.   It is about Dynamics and tone and mass and energy presented naturally so that you can experience the music on the record.   The ML2 is a big part of that.


I disagree with Vladimir’s explanation that it was a “natural sound”.   Let's face it. Any sound that comes from playback is not natural by definition, it is not a result of the vibration of subjects in the open air but a result simulation of those vibrations by artificial means. So, Lamm’s and David’s concept of natural sound (in my view) is a desire to wrap something good in a marketing (means transferable) narrative. There is nothing fundamentally wrong with it if you are just an end user. However, if you are trying to build something yourself creatively, like a loudspeaker or an amplifier then you cannot operate by parameters of “natural sound”.    You can sell it as “natural sound” but not design it as “natural sound”.    For instance, David is producing his own TT. I am sure that he is claiming his TT produces “natural sound” which might be appropriate in the context of the sale. However, when David designs it, he does not even remotely think about “natural sound”.    Instead, he operates by active engineering actions, like mass, resonance, pressure, dumping, etc. You do not design by “natural sound” but you achieve the “natural sound” utilizing very specific actions of elimination of “unnatural sounds”. It is like sculpturing you take a large piece of granite and remove anything that should not be there.
 
I do not see why ML2 should have any preference for Vitavox CN191 and what Vladimir’s was reportedly saying is irrelevant. ML2 needs a speaker with high sensitivity and easy to drive, there are not many of them out there. Vitavox CN191 is not an “exceptional” speaker. It is a very good 2-way speaker with exceptional drivers. Probably one of the best corner horns available off the shelf. If the same Vitavox did with the same driver stand-alone 4-way version, then it will be even more interesting (in my view). Look at what this guy from the North of London does with the same drivers. It is not “better” it is different but still very good. I must note that none of them, including me, can get out of Vitavox 15” driver what CN191 can do in a good room. I do not feel that it has anything to do with ML2. What I am saying is that if you dive into the world of vintage drivers, then there is an array of very different opportunities. The Vitavox CN191 is a very simple and very effective off-the-shelf solution. Do I feel that Vitavox CN191 is the best representation of ML2? Nope, I do not feel it. In my the original ML2 is much much much more intelligent and capable than ML2. In fact, I do not know any acoustic system that I would recommend with ML2 that would fully explore the ML capacity.

Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site