Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site
In the Forum: Audio Discussions
In the Thread: Initial thoughts about new/old Lamm ML2s
Post Subject: Some truth about Lamm ML2 SETPosted by Romy the Cat on: 12/8/2006
 Paul S wrote: |
Speakers: I built a version of Dick Olsher's 3-way Diamond Edition BassZilla (hard to find at www.blackdahlia.com), and I tricked it out considerably from his mule. Bass is BR, 15" Audax P380MR, which is a nice semi-stiff driver, low-passed at 150 Hz. Lowther DX4 is high-passed at 150 Hz. All drivers share a 2' X 6' front baffle, and there are tapered wings for the Lowther, which is OB. Lowther is notch filtered at 2.4k and 8k, to tame its "spikes", but I let it run itself out up top. An Arum Cantus G2Si phases in at 10k, since the Lowther trails off from that point. Driver integration is seamless.
Nework is passive, which I may address to deal with the impedance wavering from 40 Ohms at ~80 Hz (this is correct; I mis-stated it above) to 4 Ohms at ~50 Hz +/-. Otherwise, load stays near enough to 8 Ohms, where it matters.
The best I have gotten from these speakers is the best I have heard, overall, certainly better than Avante Guarde Trios, overall. Since I am so attuned to pitch and timbre, I have not found suitable horns, and also I like the dynamics I'm getting better than the tromboning I hear from horns, despite their stronger initial "push", which is nice. |
|
Well, I’m glad you like your BassZilla, you with your ML2 might eventually evolve to more capable solutions. BTW, the Avante Guarde Trios are very complex horns that require a LOT of experiences and a lot of sensibility to make then to sound reasonably, practically no one did it. However, with all things being equal, the Trios had an upperbass horn that (with a proper and very inexpensive driver) made upperbass very far from what BassZillas could even dream…
Lowthers have well-known problems, but DX4 has better potential for correct tonal/timbral balance than Alnico drivers, IMO, and addressing the "spikes" changes more for the better than some might suppose.
| Paul S wrote: |
| I still have some other work to do before I start in with bi-amping, although that is something I have considered since the beginning. I have also considered subs from the start, and if/when I get to that point I could re-address the crossover points, apropos. |
|
I use 2 pairs of ML2 with LF low-pass built at line level. Do not convert your pair of stereo “vintage” ML2 into a mono bi-amped – it will make you get another pair of ML2. Though your BassZilla might “save” you….| Paul S wrote: |
| Again, I just stay amazed that more people have not gotten onto these amps, especially since they are now available on the re-sale market. |
|
Actually you are wrong. ML2 is on marker for almost 10 years and it has very god reception by audio public. Many reviewers drool about them, the users like them and generally people have gotten onto these amps. Still me, being me, I could not do not admit that that generally warm reception ML2 has own stink. You see, ML2 does not perform well in the fields. I heard/seen/familiar many installations with ML2 and I really know what I am talking about. Yes, the ML2 (whenever I mention ML I imply the “vintage” one can come to the room staffed most of other amps and demonstrate a performance that most of other amps couldn’t even touch. However, it does not necessary says that ML2 is “good” but rather that most of the so-called hi-end amplifiers out there are unspeakable crap.
The biggest problem with ML2 were “people” and “speakers”. ML2 did not have a good contingent of serious users (because most of the people in audio are Morons) and therefore that amp was not “seriously” used in the fields, at least as serious as it could be. Then the speakers…. The industry does not produce any single speaker that from my point of view would qualify to work with ML2. Of course the industry freaks created a lot of noise about the ML2’s glory with the… speakers that the industry had to push. However! Come on! Let get some sense of reality and conscious – ML2 with all these industry speakers did not sound well. Lars Fredell – the person who marketing-wise put Lamm on the marketing map was writing his glittering doodles and singing his odes to ML2 but at the same time he was driving his ML2s with … Verity Parsifal. The Parsifals with this 85dB sensitively and MF impedance shooting over the roof are still OK loudspeakers but not for use with ML2. There are many other amps, including form Lamm that did much better job in the Lars’ room. I was there and I cat testify that Lars’ articles about the ML2’s advances were fraud and con. The Lars Fredell’s room sounded exactly like this – it was “so-so” with ML2 but it was not as near interesting as it could be if he “endorsed” more suitable loudspeakers. Anyhow, I could bring many-many similar examples but what would be the propose?...
This all brings me to a said observation that I think I have already made somewhere within my site. I recognize Lamm ML2 as a very unfortunate symbol of weakness, ridiculousness and foolishness of high-end audio. When in the end of 90s Lamm came up with ML2 the audio Morons took it almost violently. I remember it was impossible to open month mentioning ML2 because immediately a swarm of typical, “always-there” bottom-eaters ran to you, screaming with foam at this mouth that ML2 is overpriced peace of sonic crap. I remember somewhere in 2000 I was arguing with many idiots at AA about the ML2… and NONE OF THEM ACTUALLY WERE FAMILIAR with the ML2 sound. Still, any single Moron out there had a strong opinion about the ML2’s perfomance. Then the ML2 went south (I would avoid to name reasons), initially gradually and then the new revision - the ML2.1 was introduced. The ML2.1 revision has as much common sonically with original ML2 as a firecracker has in common with a ballistic missile. However, the ML2.1 receives IDENTICALLY glorifying and admiring reviews from the industry idiots as its predecessor and nowadays each second idiot who few years ago was spitting forwards Lamm has his ML2.1 sitting in his listening room. Still, the fact that the new production of Lamms sounds more like Krell amplifiers does nod bother anyone.
I think what was happening with Lamm is very-very indicative for the damn audio community generally. Most of audio Morons have no integrity, no conviction, not ability to recognize or interpret the factual results, no reference points and no familiarity with nature Sound. Nowadays the Lamms become a buzz-word for the cretins with audiogon-brains ask them “why” and they will hardly have any rational in their preferences or opinions. Still, the “vintage” L1 (some of its aspects), the “vintage” M1.1 and the “vintage” ML2 (if they properly used) remind as some very special audio elements that, because of multiple reasons (with exception of M1.1), did not really find a deserving utilization in the world of Dominating Audio Moronity ™…
Rgs,
Romy the caTRerurn to Romy the Cat's Site