decoud wrote:

I imagine the resistance to the DSET concept does not come from idiocy - Lamm may well be steeped in vanity and avarice, but he is certainly no idiot - but from resistance to combining amplification and loudspeaker in a single, coherent, monolithic system. Abstracted from the conventions of the audio world, it makes no sense to unify the amplification step when the transduction step is necessarily segregated. I wonder what Lamm said when you spoke to him about the DSET idea (as I imagine you must have done, no)?

Decoud,

I do not think Lamm’s idiocy is even under a question. Lamm, in my view, do exhibit some idiotic behavior in the realm of business conducting – the subject that is totally out of public view, however in Lamm design aspects there is zero idiocy. I do not know, nether care what Lamm think about DSET concept. His thinking and his expression of his thinking is highly conditioned. The last time I dealt with Lamm in 2002 and I remember that the last few months of our relationship was very frustrated by the internally made fence of lie and deception that Lamm was creating around his views. Perhaps it was his reaction to my emerging from my ignorance/moronity. Anyhow, it developed within me lack of respect and in a way revulsion – why do you think I terminated that relationship? So, I would not be the best person to ask “what Lamm thinks”. I have my outlook toward to the Lamm’s view, not to mention that what Lamm thinks is well described by what Lamm does. Still, Vladimir designs for public consumption and we know (as well as he knows) that public consumption is not overly demanding and not overly serious. There is also no infrastructure among the park of ready to use speakers that would be accommodated to use with DSETs. I am sure if to put Lamm in a condition where he would not be restricted by the boundaries or industry conditions then it would be possible to milk much more interesting result from him. How Lamm is different in this aspect from most of other manufacturers?

Romy the Cat wrote:

...There is also no infrastructure among the park of ready to use speakers that would be accommodated to use with DSETs... The Cat

Here are a few comments by Mike of Audio Federation about his exposure to new Lamm ML3 amp:

http://audiofederation.com/blog/archives/498

In fact it was more interning then the entire review in Soundstage, at least more informative. A few comments that I would like to make in context of the Mike’s impressions.

I am glad that Mike provided a positive feedback about ML3’s micro-dynamics (whatever it means) as I always feel that the micro-detailness was always a weak point of large transmission high voltage tubes. (Look more for the “Elephant Sound” at http://www.romythecat.com/Forums/ShowPost.aspx?postID=2182). It is possible that Lamm found a way to deal with it …or it might not be so. I have my doubts about the Mike’s comments as he was selling and listing his Ongaku for years and he never was complaining that Ongaku were micro-details challenged (and the always were). Another problem of mine is that Mike used ML3 with EMM Labs front end and with Marten Coltrane Supreme loudspeakers. The EMM Labs has a sound of person chewing aluminum foil, at least it was how it sound 3-4 years back. EMM has that unpleasant character of street prostitute make up, where smell, colors and shape are there but the substance is good only for 10 minutes service. The Marten Coltrane is not far from there – sort of glorified Kharma loudspeaker make for the people who have more money but even less ears. I have to admit that I generally hate any speakers that use stupid ceramic drivers with soft suspensions and Marten Coltrane is kind of the pinnacle of it. So, I wonder if the reported by Mike ML3’s micro-dynamics is in fact not the micro-dynamics but juts the infertile hypo –resolution of Marten’s cone and EMM Labs’s “hi-fi quality”?

The rest Mike’s comments are too dull to comment about them seriously. It would be interesting to hear the Mike’s comment about ML3’s sound after the show. Mike always overly-exuberant about the things he sells and I do not consider his feedback important but he sometimes subconsciousnessly drops between the lines a few pointers that might be worth something.

In response to http://audiofederation.com/blog/archives/501

The Federated Mike wrote:

First, the Ongaku, the Audio Note …. U.K.(!) … Ongaku, that we have here is not micro-details challenged [to say the least]. The Kondo Ongaku may indeed be challenged in this way - certainly sounds that way at shows… but then again, they put the darn things on nightstands and other suspiciously inadequate platforms that are probably sucking all the micro-details out of whatever there was there to begin with.

Mike, you got to be kidding, are you? Anyhow, I am sure that when Kondo designed his Ongaku he put in the specification the condition that amp must be used only with the stands that available for sale at Audio Federation store… I heard that he died at CES what he died when somebody accidentally put his amps on flore, is it true?

The Federated Mike wrote:

If any of you weren’t happy with digital four of five years ago - and gave up on it - give it another try. Digital music reproduction has evolved significantly in the last few years, along with the rest of the digital landscape.

Does it mean that if you look at your posts 4-5 years ago then I will find that you complained that EMM at that time was horrible? What made then to change their way beside the demands of their marketing flaks to introduce each year new model in order to extract new cash from the gullible but deaf Morons who buy this things?

The Federated Mike wrote:

And, just another pet peeve , the sound of the Martens are in fact almost diametrically opposite to the sound of Kharmas.

In the way how YOU see it, not me.

The Federated Mike wrote:

And regardless of all this - our reportage was about the sound of the ML3s in comparison to what we have heard here before - namely the ML2.1 and the higher level Audio Note.

I do not know about this. I never heard the ML3 and I have no opinion about it’s sound. I do not know if I ever will hear ML3 at the conditions that I feel worth to be critical. I know defiantly that I would not extend a lot of credit to Martens acoustic system as they are at very opposite direction to what I feel is “better way to go”. The acoustic systems is in a way was always the “Lamm’s curse” – he never was able to demonstrate his electronics with right speakers. His dealers push his electronics not with whatever it necessary to mate sonically but with whatever is profitable for them to sell, the way you do. Lamm never was able to establish good relationship with “interesting” speakers makers and always used the sonic bottom-eaters (10 year of sponsoring Kharma is of the exemplas). Wait for a few month/years and you will see Lamms will be demoed with Magicos or whatever the industry trumpetists will spin then…

The Federated Mike wrote:

And, as far as “Mike always overly-exuberant about the things he sells”, well, I try to be clear about why I recommend various things, whether we sell them or not, that I think people would love to hear for themselves. But me? Overly exuberant? If you knew me, you’d realize how much of a stretch this would be. But seriously, most people want me to be MORE exuberant on the blog - but less so than the typical reviewer - so that is the balance I struggle for.

Please, you do not wahnt to discuss this subject with me.

The Federated Mike wrote:

Anyway, Romy, you are welcome to visit here anytime, or our room at RMAF. Then, at least you would know *exactly* how bad everything sounds.

Thinks, I do not go to shows anymore, too boring and too much off the marks of my interests. It is actually why I am interning to hear your comments if the comments are free from idiotic glorification agenda and your desire to pitch to the hoodlums the BS what they would like to read. I will be reading you follow-up about ML3 sound, it is despite of the fact that you (as well as anybody else) have very positive feedback about own sonic accomplishments at the shows and despite that eat show I have attended each room sound beyond any criticism.

In his RMAF the Federated Mike post some comments about his use of ML3:

http://www.audiofederation.com/hifiing/2008/RMAF2008/report/1500/floor_9/#audio_federation

Even though his comments from my point of view have “issuers” but Mike’s comments still are way more natural then the asphyxiated crap that paid “industry reviewer” have written about ML3. Here are the Federated Mike's comments that related to Lamm’s new SET. The rest of the comments you might red at the Federated Blog:

The Lamm ML3 amps preformed spectacularly. Much more macro dynamics than at home. Likely due to HRS under Marten crossover and solidity of floor.

The ML3 is the pinnacle of the audiophile amplifier. It does all those audiophile things. Unlikely to be challenged for a decade or more. Solid-state approaches the ideal but controlling the note waveform well-enough to imitate music is not/may not ever be on the agenda. Audio Note is taking a different approach altogether [energy transfer] focusing on musicality, happy to sacrifice uber resolution and imaging when necessary. WAVAC is going for something, unknown, but unfortunately not harmonics and correct decay. Kondo, in my opinion, was going for spiritual essence. Who else is there?

About average equipment, one describes what they do well.

About excellent equipment one describes what they do not do well.

But the Lamm ML3 doesn't really do anything unexcellent. I can contrast and compare to the Audio Note Kegon Balanced and Ongaku... but, really, for the audiophile who is searching for that sound - that instantiation of everything audiophiles have been striving for in the last few decades - this is it. The exact, expected amount of harmonics [between Joule and WAVAC. OK, everybody is between Joule and WAVAC, But...], superb linearity [linearity in the harmonic content, micro- midi- and macro-dynamics up and down the frequency spectrum], resolution that has not been seen in an amplifier before, control of the microforms of each note never before seen in an amplifier, ... More later. And we were just starting to learn about this amp. Great amps take years to understand.

What will probably shock :-) the Lamms, who play Jazz and mostly Classical music, is that these amps... or at least this system with the ML3s, love Hendrix-style guitar. We talked about how these sounded great on Stevie Ray Vaughan's Tin Pan Alley. How it captured the slow guitar picks with such exquisite care that we just felt honored to be able to finally experience Stevie's talent in our living room. For all these years, I never knew how good he was. Sure, we heard the LP many times. But to hear how he was laying the pick across the strings, and how he was moving the strings around to get the exact sound - and to HEAR the exact sound he was going for....

And at the show, someone brought in a copy of the Woodstock LP, they gave it to Neli and I was out of the room at the beginning - but during the song, and into the Star Spangled Banner - it was just so colorful and rich and each layer of sound was rendered so accurately and firmly. Jimi's rendition never sounded so damned excruciatingly BEAUTIFUL before. Yeah, it is was and still is an in-your-face we-are-here noisy shout of rebellion from the youth to the old stodgy class who always seem to be trying to stop everyone from having fun, no matter which decade it is. But there seemed to be a lot more there, that the ML3 was able to extract how much effort Jimi put in, how much love and anguish and anger and caring about America he put into each of his notes. Perhaps I was reading too much into his technique - but this was really intense.

Neli tells me that she has had similar experiences with solo violin and operettas. That the ML3's capture the riveting nature of a soloist - just like a live performance. [Neli: It's not like the complexity of the orchestral background is lost -- in fact, there is a real sense, say, of individual violins in the string section -- but the listener's attention is drawn to the beauty and power of the soloists performance -- just like what happens IMO at a live show. At each level everything is rendered in perfect proportion.].

Thinking about it now - it is apparent that the system itself, even this system, in support of the Lamms, was a limiting factor.  For example, we used a 10 meter run of Valhalla, which, although sounding better at longer lengths, still should be ODIN. Well, not should be, but it would sure be nice. Another example: Nordost was kind enough to lend us a ODIN power cord, but how we wished for a PAIR; we would have put them on the ML3s. Another example: The ML3s were all on HRS M3 bases, which are the best vibration isolation available today. But the M3s were on the carpet, and putting the M3 on SXR amp stands would add another little extra boost in performance, The point is that with these amps, the system can evolve and continue to be upgraded for a very long time and you will just hear more and more of what the amps can REALLY do.

Romy the Cat wrote:

http://www.lammindustries.com/SHOWHIST/ces2009_report.html

Behind the “expected” comment form a few industry revisers there is something that I did not see. Look at the Wes Phillips’ comment under the picture of Lamm’s ML3 circuit board: “This is what the Lamm ML3 Signature looks like under the hood. Clean layout and P2P wiring throughout.”

Really, the point to point wiring throughout? Did you not a nuclear reactor in the first stage and the underwear of Princes Diana in the second and the coupling made by the Brooklyn Bridge architecture? Is ability to express idiocy the mandatory requirement to become a Stereophile staff reviewer? What actually even more finnier is not the fact of Mr. Phillips comment but the Lamm decided to publish this idiocy on his web site and by doing it he actually “certified” Phillips’ comments. Very funny!

Romy the Cat wrote:

Anyhow, this Oneobgyn retard did his typical pearl that made me very happy for all Lamm users:

“…. the output tubes are GM-70 (not GL-70) and come stock with a carbon plate. FWIW, Vladimir managed to find 6 pair of GM-70 copper plated tubes which apparently all there were in the world. I bought a pair (not cheap at $900/pair). Presents a totally different sound than the carbon plated GM-70's”

(from http://www.avguide.com/blog/listening-alert-state-the-art-the-lamm-ml3-signature-the-lamm-ll1-signature)

BTW, Oneobgyn wrote the ML3 used 6H30 tubes and this is not true. 10 years ago BAT marketing whore assured that they bought out all remaining 6H30 stock in the world. If so then how the damn Lamm (and zillion of other manufacturers) are able to source 6H30 for his amp. Imposable! Anyhow, I am glad that the idiot paid $900 for GM-70. I am sure that Lamm contributed a portion of it to the Glenn Beck’s Restoring Honor rally and I am sure the money came back to him via his new stupid customers…

Anyhow, if you see any copper GM70 then be advised that they are contraband from Mars so, Oneobgyn, boil it before sticking it on your own ass.

A few years back an editor of a “famous” audio publication asked me if I write for him. I explained to him that I have no interest to build my own audio clientele, that have no cronies manufacturers whose products I would like to promote, that I have no audio-circles who I would like to patronize and to get their worthless benefits from them and it is highly unlikely that his publication would be able even to touch the subjects that I am interested in audio. But as any respected myself whore-contractor I asked him how much he would pay me for a “review”. He said that he pays $200 but in my specials case he can go to $250. I replied that unit he talks about $20K it will be no further conversation. He told me that I was an idiot. The feeling was mutual in that case.

A few days ago somebody told me that The Absolute Sound published a review by Peter Breuninger about Lamm ML3 and LL1. I have mentioned Peter Breuninger in here:

http://www.GoodSoundClub.com/TreeItem.aspx?PostID=14480

In my post I did not call Mr. Breuninger  as an idiot but that was making fun on the comment of the dirt that really hate: “Oneobgyn” aka Steve Williams. That level of retards that Lamm is associated nowadays, good for him…

Anyhow, returning back to the Peter Breuninger review.  I do not know who Peter is it looks like he come to “reviewing circle” from “outside” but what he did is exactly what I call get when you paid $200 for a man to do the job. Even I do like some Peter’s attempts but desire to talk like the “reviewing establishment” is absolutely idiotic. Only his own expressions about ML3 (no matter how few of them in the review) are interesting and somehow accurate. The rest is file with cookie-cutter stupidity or ignorant mistakes.

The reciting of the story that Lamm does not design with listening tests is foolish. The comments like “…output transformer can handle idiotic amount of current. Voltages and currents are simply off the charts in SET designs” are to idiot to criticize. The GM70 suddenly become the “Russian Military transmitting tube” that in fact is lie - GM70 was made for transportation communications systems (railroad signaling and so on). There are many moments like this… but it all come with $200 price tag – what else could be expected.

Frankly speaking I do discard the Peter Breuninger comment as he is absolutely wrong person to express his opinion about ML3. What a guy who before ML3 used MBL 101E has to say about anything. Get yourself a pair Lamm M1.1 and spend a few years to learn about your MBL 101E. Would it be obvious that any person who has interest in sound of new Lamm amp would like to hear from people who used and well-familiar with Lamm ML2.0? Lamm ML2.0 was in production for 8 years I believe and among all very positive reviews there was NONE that give the ML2.0a justness of evaluation. The ML2.0never was properly reviewed and most of the people out there still did not know what kind amp it was and what it was capable of. Interesting that among a 2-3 dozens of ML2.0 owners that I know/knew I know one 3 people who in my view are familiar with ML2.0 sound (excluding Lamm). If anything, I would like to hear their perception about ML3, the perception that based the deep familiarly with ML2.0.

To get a guy who juts catapulted from MBL planet to make him to write his thoughts about Lamm ML3 and LL1 is worthless. I do not blame Peter Breuninger. He did his part of unconsciousness reviewing imitations. I do not think he had bad intentions. I did the same in my past what I was subconsciously structuring my thoughts into “existing reviewing format”.  It was back in 2000, thanks I am 10 year more mature from that:

http://www.audioasylum.com/reviews/Amplifier-Tube/Lamm-Audio-Laboratory/any/general/41695.html

But the point is that Peter Breuninger’s 95% of expressionism is just a tribute to the same subconsciously crap the inquiry implemented into the minds of audio users.  Peter did not have bad intentions but because he wanted to end up with a “review” his own novel about ML3 and LL1 ended to be 95% of plagiarism from any single industry idiot who wrote those stupid reviews before him. As the result the review was empty and the light was no lit on ML3 and LL1. Was no lit again….

Perhaps he's still trying to wrap his mind around the experience?  In any case, it's definitely not ready for the Robb Report!  There was the requisite mention of "components in this price category" but, otherwise, is he awestruck, or simply dumb-struck, like Harry Pearson meets Mr. Bean?  I think he means to exalt the thing; but from reading the blurb with my usual inattention, it's not clear (let alone compelling) why.

On the one hand, it's amazing there hasn't been more (better) written about this amp by now.  On the other hand, at this price point, this seems almost inevitable.

Best regards,
Paul S

Paul S wrote:

What one NEVER hears from these guys is why and how they evolve their sound over time, and this is because the particular product or products is/are the focus….

http://audiofederation.com/blog/archives/1154

http://audiofederation.com/blog/archives/1155

http://audiofederation.com/blog/archives/1156