Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site
In the Forum: Audio News
In the Thread: Lamm Industries: a special interview with a special company
Post Subject: An amplifier for “Robb Report” mind?Posted by Romy the Cat on: 1/14/2007
 Gregm wrote: |
Actually, that could be a viable commercial product: a "stereo am"p allowing for four channels. One hi side, one low side, per channel.
Any moron purchasing this could be stratosphrically happy flabbergasting his pals by "passively biamping" his speakers with what looks like one amplifier! |
|
Well, if we are talking about a high level of objective then I see it not as a "stereo amp allowing for four channels” but rather two 2-chanls monoblocks.
| Gregm wrote: |
| The conceptual futility is inherent before that stage: from the necessity to coherently drive many different drivers (with different characteristics, by definition and axiomatically) with the same single amplifier output... |
|
Not only that. My “approval” of DSET (dedicated SET with tailored OPT) derived no only form the fact of different drivers but form the fact that LF and HF serve in any acoustic system absolutely different purposes and require absolutely different handling method. Take for instance the Wilson Alexandria – well designed and well implemented loudspeaker. When I was listening them I was very pleased with many positive things about them but at the same time I was disappointed with a large amount of compromises that those speaker had. The compromised were not because David does not know better, I presume he does, but because those speaker piles all fundament limitations of the given topology into the same box.
http://www.goodsoundclub.com/TreeItem.aspx?PostID=2771
LF and HF are different animals and as soon peoples recognize it and begin to behave as they recognize it the better result would be. LF and HF are different animals from multiple points of view: from perspective of loudspeakers, from perspective of electronics and from perspective of room interaction. It is virtually imposable (very hard) within a single loudspeaker-box to position the speakers where LF and HF would be served at their best. Even HF and LF imaging has very different objectives and implementation means, as least they require different size and location. I would like do not go dive into the subject of loudspeakers too much as this thread about Lamms, so the point that I was trying to pass that any serious audio user paying his single pair of $20.000, $50.000, $100.000 or $150.000 amps has in his hands fundamentally compromised amplifiers because of their unnecessary wide-range operation made around the compromised out stages (OPT). Thos amplifiers are all “defective” because people who designed them went for expensive (presumably) implementation instead of targeting rich results. I understand that the industry is trying convincing users that price of implementation addresses problem. In many instanced it might be so but not in case of output transformer of single ended triode amplifier.
What disappoints me is the agreeable silence of all our reviewing dirt – east time what they see an expensive set they dive into stupid drooling and lack of any consciousness. They, all of them without exception, are absolutely silent regarding the topological worthless of expensive SETs or more widly about the benefits of many other expensive items in audio. It should be their job to assess topologies and worth of investments into them and point users to the most fruitful directions. I think people who agree to pay $100.000 for amplifiers, $20.000 for a cable, $40.000 for CD player or $10.000 for a cartridge deserve better service. Unfortunately Lamm products lately, and the industry generally, demonstrate rational more suitable for “Robb Report” where a glossy superficial sentimental sensationalism takes over of any cogent purposeness. I’m sure the new Lamm ML3, as any other expansive SET will be a drop of oil into the same flame of worthless consumption.
After all - are we building amplifiers in audio or we build Sound? I think an expensive SET is an amplifier demonstrates preoccupation with processes instead of result. The unfortunate thing is that behind that preoccupation we, the users, will not have an answer about the real capacity of a direct-heated GM70. Sure, it might be a lot of fun and very educational to listing the Lamm ML3 or the biggest Wavac. The biggest question would be what the hell to do them then when you own it?
Rgs,
Romy the CatRerurn to Romy the Cat's Site