You had TAPE !When I bought the Signature series I did not have a turntable so I know what you mean by prove themselves with digital so I bought the LP1 separately a few years later
david
You had TAPE !When I bought the Signature series I did not have a turntable so I know what you mean by prove themselves with digital so I bought the LP1 separately a few years later
The natural companion of the Lamm ML3 arrived today, I could not resist listening before straightening and ranging everything, even is such poor conditions - yes, I know thick undercarpet and wheeled platforms are not Vladimir Lamm vision of audio racks. All I can say for now is transients, palpable, space and 3D. BTW, it measures perfectly!
I think those Lamms are fantastic!
Have you been able to compare them directly to the Siegfried IIs?
Agreed. Every SET I have tried sounded better on the 8 ohm tap. Much fewer windings perhaps...Micro
Try the 8 ohm tap. IMO it sounds better.
Makes you wonder why 97db Evolution Acoustics speakers were running out of gas with this amp...aren’t XLFs “only” 92db??I am waiting for the arrival of a VTL 7.5 mk3 to carry direct comparisons. The Lamm's clearly sound very different from the ARC REF40 + Siegfried II, but I have not listened to Siegfried II's / XLF time enough to post on it. Besides the cables were also very different.
One nice think is that the Lamm's objectively (measuremenst) have power enough for the XLFs. I will be only able to refer to subjective power when I listen to the Siegfried II's at the same power levels.
BTW, when we get the Siegfried's we get 8 amps - 2 modes and 4 levels of feedback. Curiously the damping of the tetrode mode in low feedback is the same of that of the Lamm ML3, no feedback, 4 ohms.
Agreed. Every SET I have tried sounded better on the 8 ohm tap. Much fewer windings perhaps...
Micro
Try the 8 ohm tap. IMO it sounds better.
It is still under evaluation.
I am waiting for the arrival of a VTL 7.5 mk3 to carry direct comparisons. The Lamm's clearly sound very different from the ARC REF40 + Siegfried II, but I have not listened to Siegfried II's / XLF time enough to post on it. Besides the cables were also very different.
One nice think is that the Lamm's objectively (measuremenst) have power enough for the XLFs. I will be only able to refer to subjective power when I listen to the Siegfried II's at the same power levels.
BTW, when we get the Siegfried's we get 8 amps - 2 modes and 4 levels of feedback. Curiously the damping of the tetrode mode in low feedback is the same of that of the Lamm ML3, no feedback, 4 ohms.
Sorry, you are incorrect. 4 ohm tap achieves a lower impedance by having more turns, which gives a larger step down between primary and secondary. You get a larger ratio with more turns, hence a lower impedance. Thus it is labeled 4 ohm tap. More turns=more wire.No, the 4 ohms has fewer turns ...
There is no universal rule on this subject - it depends mainly on amplifier impedance and also on the transformer implementation. But probably the speakers that are more often used with SETs have high impedance and naturally sound better with the 8 ohm tap.
The damping factor at 8 ohm is lower than at 4 ohms, but voltage is higher. One common mistake when comparing the 4 versus 8 ohm tap is keeping the level control in the same position - the 8 ohm easily wins because it is 3 dB louder.
......One nice think is that the Lamm's objectively (measuremenst) have power enough for the XLFs. I will be only able to refer to subjective power when I listen to the Siegfried II's at the same power levels.......
Makes you wonder why 97db Evolution Acoustics speakers were running out of gas with this amp...
Of course an amp can turn to mush sonically before it actually clips. Many amps are inadequate in the power supply and output transformers (not a SS issue)...not that I would expect the Lamm to fall into either category...That don't even have to play fullrange because of the powered subwoofer towers...
Makes you wonder why 97db Evolution Acoustics speakers were running out of gas with this amp...aren’t XLFs “only” 92db??