Lamm ML3 + LL1, at last!

[KeithR]

There is a Belgian distributor for Aries Cerat (Ultrasone). Check him out.

This is a bespoke manufacturer just like Cessaro and some others. Very different from Wilson, Kharma, etc. AG, love em or hate em, is the most accessible high efficiency speaker brand in the world. And that often matters to people when considering a $165k pair of amps. That's all I mean.

Also as far as the ML3, it uses a tube that a lot of SET people don't go after. To them above 8 watts isn't necessary.

 

[bonzo75]

This is a bespoke manufacturer just like Cessaro and some others. Very different from Wilson, Kharma, etc. AG, love em or hate em, is the most accessible high efficiency speaker brand in the world. And that often matters to people when considering a $165k pair of amps. That's all I mean.

Also as far as the ML3, it uses a tube that a lot of SET people don't go after. To them above 8 watts isn't necessary.

Spot on. I personally wouldn't want that tube or that power for most horns. The speakers I need power for it cannot drive.

 

[morricab]

This is a bespoke manufacturer just like Cessaro and some others. Very different from Wilson, Kharma, etc. AG, love em or hate em, is the most accessible high efficiency speaker brand in the world. And that often matters to people when considering a $165k pair of amps. That's all I mean.

Also as far as the ML3, it uses a tube that a lot of SET people don't go after. To them above 8 watts isn't necessary.

Not bespoke, it is a brand with distribution all over Europe, Asia and North America.

 

[microstrip]

You will always find people who give the advice you are looking for. It is good practice to ignore those who opine to the contrary

No, I listen to all opinions. But in an hobby ruled essentially by preference I give little value to opinions of those who hate the products I like, although I can consider their opinion on what they like and have large experience.

 

[microstrip]

(...) Also as far as the ML3, it uses a tube that a lot of SET people don't go after. To them above 8 watts isn't necessary.

Although I have little experience with SETs in my system I found the ML3 to be a lot more than 30W - in some aspects, such as high frequency purity, richness and attack it was unique.

 

[tima]

No, I listen to all opinions. But in an hobby ruled essentially by preference I give little value to opinions of those who hate the products I like, although I can consider their opinion on what they like and have large experience.

The whole product love, product hate thing gets really tiresome.

 

[Lagonda]

Not bespoke, it is a brand with distribution all over Europe, Asia and North America.

And judging from all the representation on WBF, the biggest best selling tube equipment company in the world !

 

[ddk]

Wilson Audio sensitivity figures have been properly measured by reviewers more than once in several countries. As far as I could see Karma always shows their Midi Grand Exquisites with amplifiers of more than 100W. Room and listening position are an important factor when considering power needs - I enjoy listening at around 12 feet from the speakers in a long room, it needs more power than close listening.

I wasn't talking about Wilson it was a general comment I address them directly if it had to do with them. Go on YouTube, John Devore did anentire video on the issue of sensitivity.

I don't know where you come up with the idea of close up listening, if you read our show reports you'd know that we're usually in a large suite or a ballroom. No problem with ML3/Kharma combination filling the big space with sound even with many people in the room. Front row seats are at least 6m away from the speakers. Also both of my installations sit farther than 12' from the speakers.

Yes, he wrote an enthusiastic review of the ML3 with the Alexandria's. He was extremely pleased with bass depth and dynamics, no complains complains about "large, heavy slow woofers" .
I owned the X2 before moving to XLFs and measured impedance and sensitivity of both speakers - quite similar, although I found that the XLF was sonically much better. It was why I had some expectations on the pairing - when I asked advice in WBF before buying the Lamm ML3 most people were extremely favorable.

Are you selling your amps because of the great bass and dynamics you’re getting with the Wilsons ? I'm worried about you now, a few posts earlier you wrote this and going by Michelson's review you could be deaf !

Yes, I swapped them many times on the XLF. The ML3 is surely a better amplifier, but listening to the M1.2ref immediately shows that, at less in my long room, the XLF needs better damping and perhaps more power (current?) to have real dynamics.

If you recall I suggested a very different type of speaker for your ML3.

david

 

[Ron Resnick]

I agree about reading between the lines, but with a good review . . . It helps to have some familiarity with the reviewer over time. . . .

+1

 

[Ron Resnick]

took a look at this awhile ago, but Gobel doesn't appear SET friendly (h/t JA):

Göbel specifies the Divin Marquis's sensitivity as 92dB/W/m; my estimate was a little lower, at a still-high 89.5dB(B)/2.83V/m. The Divin Marquis's impedance is specified as 4 ohms with a minimum value of 3.4 ohms at 95Hz. The impedance magnitude (fig.1, solid trace) remains between 4 and 6 ohms for almost the entire audioband, with a minimum value of 2.9 ohms between 83Hz and 99Hz. The electrical phase angle (dashed trace) is generally low, but there is also a current-hungry combination of 5 ohms and a phase angle of –45° at 26Hz. I used the formula in a 1994 JAES paper by Eric Benjamin to calculate what UK writer Keith Howard has called the "equivalent peak dissipation resistance" (EPDR, footnote 1). The Divin Marquis has minimum EPDRs of 1.77 ohms at 25Hz and 1.53 ohms between 53Hz and 57Hz. Though the EPDR is close to 4 ohms in the midrange and treble, this Göbel loudspeaker will work best with amplifiers that are comfortable driving loads below 4 ohms.

You basically have AG Trios as a modern, SOTA alternative.

I agree on the Marquis. The Marquis is significantly less sensitive than the 98dB sensitive Majestic.

 

[howiebrou]

I agree on the Marquis. The Marquis is significantly less sensitive than the 98dB sensitive Majestic.

The youngest child is always more confident.

 

[ddk]

Some interesting information on speaker sensitivity.

david

 

[andromedaaudio]

For all the wilson , lamm dealers/ lovers here .
You could come together and ask wilson to design a Set friendly version of some of the big speakers they produce today .


It would have different units then the current ones and wired differntly , and some used units back then are out of production ,but im sure they could produce something like the X 1, X 2 . Spec speakers
But in holland most dealers like to sell solid state , no tube hassle /easier sales so a harder to drive speaker aint a problem.


Microstrip where is the XLF Ml 3 review i ve never seen it .
Do you have a link ?

The Xlf is not as easy a speaker as the X2 .

 

[bonzo75]

No, I listen to all opinions. But in an hobby ruled essentially by preference I give little value to opinions of those who hate the products I like, although I can consider their opinion on what they like and have large experience.

Yes but you got that wrong. Your interpretation of people's preferences and opinions made you put the amp on sale three months after receiving it

 

[bonzo75]

Flashback time where James bond beat Jack Ryan

Zero Distortion: Tango Time

Btw, just found out that if anyone is interested in buying the Cessaro Liszt for 60k or so GBP, a Cessaro dealer in the UK is selling.

www.whatsbestforum.com

 

[christoph]

That is hard to say because they were in completely different contexts. Different systems in different rooms.

With difficult to drive speakers I would prefer the hybrid. It sounded fantastic on a pair of hard to drive speakers. With high-efficiency speakers, I would prefer the 18 W SET. That is a slice of heaven.

Thanks, Peter
Can you say what the speakers were the different Lamms had to drive?

I do own an pair M1.1 but I have never heard a pair of ML2.x.
One pair of ML3 I heard at a show, but with unfamiliar rest of the system, so can't really judge...

 

[tima]

Some interesting information on speaker sensitivity.

That's an excellent video from John Devore with a v. clear explanation. For a long time Ralph Karsten has been discussing similar from an amplifier maker's perspective. Here is a snippet:

"In the world of speakers, efficiency of the speaker has been an issue that the Voltage camp has had to address, as the older Power Paradigm specification of 1 watt/1 meter was a 'chink in the armour'. The new Voltage Paradigm specification, Senstivity, illustrates the point: 2.83V/ 1 meter is the spec, resulting in a sound pressure expressed in db, just like the Efficiency specification. 2.83 Volts into an 8 ohm load is 1 watt (in other words the two specs have the same meaning if the speaker is 8 ohms). 2.83 Volts into 4 ohms is 2 watts. Thus, a speaker can have a senstivity rating that looks the same as the efficiency rating, but the speaker can be several decibels less efficient if the impedance is lower. This is an easy way to cover up how much power it really takes to drive a speaker, and also creates an expression that moves the efficiency issue into the Voltage Paradigm nomenclature. It would also seem to create a 'buyer be ware' situation: you have to know how to interpret the numbers to get to the truth of the matter."

Read the full article

Resources: Paradigms in Amplifier Design

Voltage Paradigm vs. Power Paradigm. Competing Paradigms in Amplifier and Loudspeaker Design, Test, and Measurement.

www.atma-sphere.com

 

[morricab]

I agree on the Marquis. The Marquis is significantly less sensitive than the 98dB sensitive Majestic.

Yes and apparently significantly less sensitive than they claim (probably the Majestic is not really 98db either). That would still not be an issue necessarily if the load was easier. The Dynamikks Athos 10s I have are not super sensitive (91db) but they are a very easy load (min of 6 ohms) and so work well with everything from about 11 watts up (the 5 watt amp was a bit weak). With a 20 watt Ayon Spark they rocked the house! So, the Marquis, if it had really been a 92db speaker rather than about 89db (that 3db means you need double the power they claim ) coupled to a lowish impedance means it will not be low power SET friendly but something in the 30-100 watt range with very robust output transformers, would work.

 

[PeterA]

Thanks, Peter
Can you say what the speakers were the different Lamms had to drive?

I do own an pair M1.1 but I have never heard a pair of ML2.x.
One pair of ML3 I heard at a show, but with unfamiliar rest of the system, so can't really judge...

Christoph, I heard the ML2 in Utah for seven days on four different high efficiency speakers. I heard the ML1 on a slightly less efficient speaker. I listened to the M1.1 on a pair of Magicos for several days. Each speaker/amp combination sounded really excellent, but the key seems to be to match the correct Lamm amp to the specific speaker demands.

 

[christoph]

Christoph, I heard the ML2 in Utah for seven days on four different high efficiency speakers. I heard the ML1 on a slightly less efficient speaker. I listened to the M1.1 on a pair of Magicos for several days. Each speaker/amp combination sounded really excellent, but the key seems to be to match the correct Lamm amp to the specific speaker demands.

I experienced similar results with my Lamm M1.1 and my KR Audio SETs.

On my ex-Apogee Scintillas, the M1.1 was by far the best sounding Amp I have tried (that was able to drive the dreaded 1 Ohm Scinitllas) but already on the (very) easy to drive Apogee Studio Grands, I preferred my KR Audio 350 and KR Audio Kronzilla SX by quite a margin.
I would probably also prefer the Lamm ML X.X over the Lamm M1.x on the Apogee Studio Grands

I wonder if you would maybe even prefer the Lamm M1.x over your Pass Amps on your Magicos...
Have you ever made that comparison?