Is High End Audio Gear Worth the Money?
- Thread starter Ron Resnick
- Start date
I don’t honestly know on the “both a smidge” question. The upper end cables I have tried all seem to have strengths and weaknesses. I would prefer a neutral cable if one existed.
What’s your opinion on the matter?
I find it interesting you don't need a pre amp for a digitally sourced high-end system, why is that do you think?
My first high-end purchase was a Conrad Johnson PV6 back in the day which replaced an entry level mid-fi Conrad Johnson PV10. The difference was chalk and cheese, the music came alive and became addictive.
Peter,
Unfortunately you decide to comment on my intentions and acts in an other poster bullying comment . Why not asking me directly before writing speculative false information?
which neither objectively supports nor negates preferences. shades of grey at best. cases for ideal matches are simply data points, not proof or evidence. the ML3 is not 2 or 3 or 7 watts. it's 32 tube watts. the speakers are not 85db 2 ohm. they are on the reasonably efficient end of things. and no one is expecting miracles.
yes; mostly i'm not digging in. just hanging out.
and i just pick my spots more carefully now. like when past tired reasonings i have history with are trotted out.
Last edited:
how high end is it really? if adding a high level stand alone preamp sounds better, would it be added?
certainly there are degrees of high end. it's not one singular spot.
so we continue to pump the narrative that Lamm gear can only be judged with certain speakers. yet we know other Lamm ML3 users using those speakers and being very happy.
why don't you bother Steve Williams with all this stuff? and explain to him how it's not working? he uses his own special cables. are they Lamm certified?yet myself and Francisco just did not prefer what we heard to alternatives. neither of us disliked the Lamm. we simply liked something else more for our own particular reasons.
maybe you two could issue validity badges for when gear gets sold and the reasons are legit so we can keep things properly approved.
Mike,
In fact, it is hard to understand why some (not all) Lamm lovers seem to need such narratives to justify their preferences.
I wrote it in detail years ago, but can admit people do not remember. I did not use any of my Transparent Audio Opus cables (power, signal and speaker) with Lamm. They were tuned for output impedances very different from those of the LL1 or ML3 and Lamm's should not be used with network cables. The cabling I used was supplied by DDK or approved by him. I still have it, Ching Chengs included and extra hardware included. I will not give more details on them and my opinion as it was a very private sale.
Before getting the ML3's from you I surely asked advice from DDK and Vladimir Lamm about using them with the XLF - it was very favorable, surely I will not release private emails.
BTW, the usually referred and approved Karma's are less sensitive and have an harder impedance curve than the XLF's.
I think Steve ordered new speakers recently.so we continue to pump the narrative that Lamm gear can only be judged with certain speakers. yet we know other Lamm ML3 users using those speakers and being very happy.
why don't you bother Steve Williams with all this stuff? and explain to him how it's not working? he uses his own special cables. are they Lamm certified?
maybe you two could issue validity badges for when gear gets sold and the reasons are legit so we can keep things properly approved.
Lamm's are not neutral. As I owned the ML3, ML2.2 and M1.2 - in order to sell the ML3 I had to get a ML2.2 in part exchange ...- and during a short period I had all of them playing side by side, driven by the LL1. They sound very different. If you have doubts read what your friend Romy wrote about each of them.
For me, Lee, a natural presentation is one that is balanced. I have tried to avoid components that draw attention to themselves or can be identified as slightly colored or a smidge in one direction of neutral. You seem to be describing cables, which have trade-offs. You like the forward midrange warmth of one cable, but it doesn’t have the resolution of ann anlternative. And you like the cable that is more resolving, but it has less midrange warmth. I would avoid both cables and keep looking for a cable that meets my criteria and that I do not see as a compromise.
It does not matter to me at all if it is “well regarded“, just as it doesn’t matter to me if it is considered “high-end“. I have my own criteria and will not buy something that does not fully meet it, regardless of reputation. And if there is any hesitancy about trade-offs, if the cable is also expensive, I would simply avoid it. Given the descriptions of the two cables you’re describing, I would avoid them both and look for the cable that fully meets your criteria.
Not sure but OCD Mike also advocates no pre amp with Playback Designs and Meitner DACs which most would put in the high-end category. Yet with analog sources a pre amp will make or break a system.
Francisco, do you think your Wilson speakers were the best match with the Lamm amplifier? What cables do you use between the preamp and amp and speakers? Did you use a rack for your Lamm gear or did you play them on the floor as demonstrated in the photographs you shared? You had eight boxes and I saw them all spread out on the floor. How much time was there between insertion into your system and your decision to sell them? Finally, did you consult with David Karmeli about amplifier speaker matching and what did he recommend? Thank you very much.
Last edited:
Yes, I never claimed the amplifiers all sounded exactly the same. I compared the ML2 to the M1.1 in my system and in another system. To be fully appreciated, each amplifier must be paired with the appropriate speaker. In my system, the M1.1 sounded better with my Magico, and the ML2 sounded better with the Vitavox.
I don’t think I could identify the sound of either amplifier outside of the context of the speaker it is driving.
Romy has a very interesting history with Vladimir and I suspect his writings are reflection of that. He did tell me he very much likes the original ML2.
advocating no preamp with a high level dac and going direct is different thing all together from the question of which performs better. did OCD Mike do a specific compare and detail his results? i'm asking the question as he very well might have. i do not follow him so have no idea.
i think OCD Mike is also a dealer. so that is a factor in his perspective.
but i did investigate this question for myself as the internal passive preamp of the MSB Select II is very highly regarded.
when i owned the MSB Select II i was mighty impressed going direct to my amps. and i would strongly recommend it and did. however; inserting my dart preamp was certainly better, but it's a big mountain to climb adding a $70k preamp to an all digital system. hard to make sense of it unless you want the best sound. hard to surpass the battery powered dart pre.
objectively maybe there is a point of preamp performance below which the direct simplicity of eliminating the preamp and cables surpasses adding the preamp. and preamp performance above that point leans toward having one. this is both a dollar and performance question......and price/value is not linear. might even matter which brand of amps and preamps you use.
i do think many times this is a WAF issue, or just a lifestyle decorating issue. people want simple and elegant and even hidden. so using an integrated volume control is the slick way to go. YMMV.
people do things for all sorts of personal reasons.
Last edited:
Well, I asked several times for advice and never got any useful advice. Just vintage, hard to obtain or colored speakers that were not my preference.
And I am not addressing high level listening in a very large room.
You can find easily the threads in WBF.
The cables sent and advised by DDK. He is not in WBF anymore, I will pass this subject.
Both ways - I had the special amp stands advised by Vladimir Lamm.
If an amplifier does not play to my preference on the floor, I do not expect the stand to modify it.
More than a year I think , several years to find a buyer with big money losses. Some people gave up after reading your friend Romy blog comments on Vladimir and his designs ...
Yes, we exchanged many mails. Again do not expect me to share private emails information.
+1
I think it takes a top-tier preamp to match (or almost match) the transparency of a passive box, tack on nothing sonically detrimental, but add dynamics, life and energy that the passive cannot achieve. And those top-tier pre-amps are expensive.
Considering most modern DACs , technically the preamplifier is an useless and impossible to justify extra equipment. It does not add gain or perform impedance matching. All it can do is add some colorations that probably we like and find to benefit the performance of our systems. Surely it has switching capabilities, but suppose someone does not need them.
I say it since long, but until now I always preferred the sound of my system with a preamplifier.
Similar threads
- Locked
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |