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: Wojtek, the actual point of this thread is quite differentPosted by Gregm on: 1/29/2007
No-one is criticising the ML3 (amplification) product. We are discussing the concept and the applicability of such products, i.e. the ultimate limitation of an amplifier called upon to work from DC to daylight and, accordingly, drive a loudspeaker that's also supposed to produce music in a homogenous manner from DC to daylight. The ML3 served as an illustration and, as it's a new product fm Lamm, we also speculated as to its design parametres.

 Wojtek wrote:
...since you're quite critical about last Lamm's creations the chance is that the amp is indeed poor...
No, no. If anything, I for one can readily concede that the amp probably "sounds" good in a specific application (this would seem mids-upward), until proven otherwise.

Sorry but if company ask $126K for an amp with parts count worth of 500$ plus maybe , maybe another $500 in transformers I'd think they could spend a few grands to make the room to sound good.
Sure, OK -- only, that's not as easy as you make it sound!
I love this thread .Paul paid $12k for an amp he never heard ,300$ for a pair of 15$ tubes and now we talk about the amp nobody heard. I guess thats what you call "target listening" personally I don't give a fuck what owners of big Wilsons will use to drive their speakers but I'm interested how the amp performs.
Again, the point under discussion has been the application not "how the amp sounds". If you say "how the amp sounds" what do you mean?? Reproducing mid-highs with the appropriate OT? Designed for mid-bass with a different OT?....
Besides guys who spend half a million on hi-fi are not going to bother with bi tri-amp . How would you market this concept?
Agreed. A few have actually mentioned this already. HOWEVER, I don't know if it's impossible to market -- in fact, I believe that someone like Lamm could market such a product and people would listen (at least a few anyway-- at the price of the ML3 as is there are only few customers anyway... so what's the loss? 
All the competition is able to do with one channel and Lamm needs two ??
That's not quite correct. You'll notice there are products -- see loudspeakers -- where the bass section is already amplified independantly. So the idea of needing different/discreet applification for low frequencies vs the rest of the spectrum is hardly novel.
If, OTOH you're referring to the marketing risk (i.e. so many amps are "wide bandwidth" dc-to-daylight" and Lamm can't do this, I again think that with Lamm's market reputation, the "two channel per channel"Lamm  (as you describe it) might have created a stir in the Market...

Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site