Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site

jessie.dazzle wrote:

I don't have a problem with what Lamm has done in offering the ML3 (ignoring the price)... If I have a problem it is more related to how the product is being represented. Representations aside, depending on how it sounds, the ML3 could well be a product that has its place.

I don't have a problem with what Lamm has done in offering the ML3 including the price. ML3 might be a fine product for anyone who understands the value of amplifier at the level of “presold products” instead of at the level of the most optimum solution for a given application. Marketing-wise what Lamm does is perfectly fine, still I the ML3 might be an OK sounding amps but it is by default is a compromised IDEA of better single ended amplifiers. That is what I against in ML3. I would not be bitching if Atma-Sphere, Audio research, Wavelength or Cary came up with some “pretentious” SET – they accustom to do mediocre things but my expectorations with Lamm are much higher.  If Lamm, at least that Lamm that I use to know and who made ML2.0 and L1, will run production with half-ass or quart-ass objectives then from whom else to ask?

jessie.dazzle wrote:

I would of course really like to see Lamm offer (in parallel) amps that inspire speaker makers to concentrate on high-sensitivity offerings... A no-compromise 5-watt SET for example. Offering a DSET solution would be really interesting, but I don't see how it could be done without knowing exactly to which load (speakers) the amp might be paired. This would seem to require working closely with a speaker maker... But once again, why not? Lamm certainly has the credentials and the contacts...

Well, a reference version of ML3 should be DSET with two GM70 (if to choose to use this tube). One GM70 should be for MF without any running into A2, with not buffer build up in second stage, with low inductance OPT perhaps with no feedback from output stage (no one case about the output impedance in there). It might be even perhaps some kind of other lower power DHT with AC on filaments – and, as you said, I would LOVE to see LAMM make 5-10-watt SET – it will be more HF capable because the negligible capacitance of OPT.  The second GM70 is the bass drive with all heavy entering into A2 and with exact matching of output impedance and large capacitance in PS + a very large core mass of OPT. That amp, I call it ML4 might have the same price as size as ML3 but it perform at absolutely different level then ML3. So, I do not call ML3 as “bad amp” but I do vote ML3 as fundamentally compromised IDEA of better amp.

What is also is very funny is that Lamm himself injected those seeds in my dead. When I was a few years back was asking Vladimir if ML3 (ML3 was read as a prototype a very long time ago) will be able to over-perform two sets of ML2. Vladimir told that two ML2 will be more advanced than ML3. Interning was that he was lying, as in many other occasions and two ML2 are not the same as one ML3. ML2 in order to be contestable for DSET configuration should go a major overview and Lamm obviously did not what to be engaged in THAT conversation…

I still, in my infinite stupid maximalism, would like to see a noble and objectionable ideas rendered into production amplifiers not just another tool to pay mortgage. I do not see ML3 as “objectionable idea” that might push anything further. The Marc Mickelsons-like cheerleaders will sell for Lamm that amp to public and it will push well nicely the noise out of the crappie Wilsons’ ports. It will be it and the idea of a better amp from Lamm will be fulfilled only at the level of the “Sound by Singer” showroom.

Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site