Natural Sound

[microstrip]

No one was ever focused just or even mainly on the speakers...well you were apparently. I think I understand that you are a speaker focused individual. You would be better off, IMO, if you keep the LAMM ML3s and dump the Wilsons for something that is more sympathetic to the LAMMs. That will yield a more natural sound than trying to get a good match with those speakers, IMO.

Sorry, you think wrong - I am equally focused in all the elements of the system, including the digital source and tape.

Concerning the ML3, the list of acceptable speakers reduces every time we address it with realistic examples for someone who really enjoyed the XLF's , the SF Aida's or electrostatics. I am not desperately pushing the Lamm's ML3 away - if I keep them I would probably go DIY, but currently I can't consider it.

 

[PeterA]

I think not. Vintage speakers sound as different from each other as any other speakers. David's Bionors probably sound radically different from his JBLs...I am not sure what the other two pairs were.

Here is what I heard in Utah:

1. Siemens Bionor, Lamm ML3, AS2000, big room
2. Vitavox CN 191, Lamm ML2, Micro SX 8000 II, small room
3. JBL M9500, Lamm ML2, Micro SX 8000 II, small room
4. Mitsubishi Diatone, Lamm ML2, AS2000, big room

Four pretty different speakers, one not even horns, all driven by Lamm SET amps and massive belt drive turntables. These four systems sounded different from each other, but they shared a common sound. David calls it "Natural Sound". I heard the same characteristics from all four systems to slightly different degrees, wrote them down in my notebook, listed them, and posted them in two threads. These characteristics describe a sound radically different from the sound I am familiar with in the systems of my local Boston audio friends, and of the systems I have heard at dealers and at shows.

My memory of my former system is that it too sounded radically different from these four systems until I started my long series of experiments to make that system sound more natural. Those experiments mostly involved set up, but also cable and power cord choices and how I supported the gear. I actually thought, as did some musician visitors, that my former Magico Q3s sounded quite natural driven by the Lamm M1.1 hybrid amps. The sound does not seem exclusive to high efficiency speakers and tubes, but I think it helps.

It is clear to me that there are different ways to achieve this type of sound, so I would not subscribe to the idea that it depends on specific gear, though some gear would preclude the system from ever sounding natural. Natural Sound is a specific type of sound that results in the characteristics I heard from those four systems in Utah and wrote on my list. Interestingly, I also heard it from a small digital office system in David's workroom, and from a CD player in his small room.

I suspect that this sound is not unique to vintage speakers. It is a whole-system approach which can include non vintage speakers. I think David would suggest that it has a lot to do with the electronics and that it is easy to kill the whole thing with the wrong power cord or room treatment.

 

[bonzo75]

Sorry, you think wrong - I am equally focused in all the elements of the system, including the digital source and tape.

Concerning the ML3, the list of acceptable speakers reduces every time we address it with realistic examples for someone who really enjoyed the XLF's , the SF Aida's or electrostatics. I am not desperately pushing the Lamm's ML3 away - if I keep them I would probably go DIY, but currently I can't consider it.

getting close.

 

[PeterA]

Sorry, you think wrong - I am equally focused in all the elements of the system, including the digital source and tape.

Concerning the ML3, the list of acceptable speakers reduces every time we address it with realistic examples for someone who really enjoyed the XLF's , the SF Aida's or electrostatics. I am not desperately pushing the Lamm's ML3 away - if I keep them I would probably go DIY, but currently I can't consider it.

I suspect there are other alternatives and am sure David could suggest appropriate matches to your ML3s. They can drive more speakers than can my ML2s. Have you contacted Lamm directly for suggestions?

 

[microstrip]

Of course! I was talking about semantics that has absorbed a good portion of this thread and you know exactly what I'm going on about.

david

Well, some of my (and other people) questions concerning Natural Sound were direct and not about semantics and are still unanswered ...

 

[morricab]

Sorry, you think wrong - I am equally focused in all the elements of the system, including the digital source and tape.

Concerning the ML3, the list of acceptable speakers reduces every time we address it with realistic examples for someone who really enjoyed the XLF's , the SF Aida's or electrostatics. I am not desperately pushing the Lamm's ML3 away - if I keep them I would probably go DIY, but currently I can't consider it.

Then why did you think others were focused on the vintage speakers?

 

[microstrip]

I suspect there are other alternatives and am sure David could suggest appropriate matches to your ML3s. They can drive more speakers than can my ML2s. Have you contacted Lamm directly for suggestions?

You see - I only get suspicions. David did his best, but his very few suggestions were not acceptable for me.

Vladimir Lamm had the XLF with the ML3 in 2013 in his factory room.

 

[Steve williams]

Micro

as I have said before, the Wilson X2 series ll should be considered. The ML3's sound wonderful on mine

 

[microstrip]

Then why did you think others were focused on the vintage speakers?

I did not think. I only referred that as far as I could see very few people had experience with the speakers being used in the system that is the main objective of this thread.

But yes, IMHO there is a clear bias towards vintage in this thread.

 

[morricab]

You see - I only get suspicions. David did his best, but his very few suggestions were not acceptable for me.

Vladimir Lamm had the XLF with the ML3 in 2013 in his factory room.

Why the insistence on staying with Wilson speakers?

 

[microstrip]

Micro

as I have said before, the Wilson X2 series ll should be considered. The ML3's sound wonderful on mine

Thanks. I owned the X2 before the XLF. IMHO and preference the XLF is so much better than the X2 that I could not consider going backward. It is my main problem - once we get used to the XLF is not easy to find anything that is not a step back.

Anyway, as I referred elsewhere, my future space will not accept 72" tall speakers. Otherwise my opinion about the XLF would probably be the same you have on the ML3 - they stay forever ....

 

[microstrip]

Why the insistence on staying with Wilson speakers?

No insistence, simply no one suggests anything else, although David suggested a specific Kharma model.

 

[morricab]

I did not think. I only referred that as far as I could see very few people had experience with the speakers being used in the system that is the main objective of this thread.

But yes, IMHO there is a clear bias towards vintage in this thread.

I got the impression it was a bias towards Horn/SET and not vintage per se. Just because the horns Peter got are vintage...the Lamms are still basically current. Nothing from the Micro Seiki is really vintage as many similarly designed TTs exist today (like your AF1). Granted both are "vintage" technologies...but aren't most audio technologies by now? Even the ion tweeter is over 100 years old in concept...actually predates moving coils speakers.

 

[morricab]

No insistence, simply no one suggests anything else, although David suggested a specific Kharma model.

Aries Cerat, Avantgarde, Odeon (new Carnegie model is amazing), Acapella, Dynamikks Athos (big one not smaller ones). All cheaper than your XLFs (but not cheap) and all work very well with something like the ML3.

 

[PeterA]

I did not think. I only referred that as far as I could see very few people had experience with the speakers being used in the system that is the main objective of this thread.

But yes, IMHO there is a clear bias towards vintage in this thread.

Objective or objection? Either way, Micro, so what? Is that a bad thing? People seem interested. Horns are rare, corner horns rarer, and Vitavox CN-191 rarer still, especially this era. The thread is about a mostly vintage system bought from a dealer who deals in vintage speakers.

In other member system threads, the discussion runs mostly on the new Rockport, Wilson, Magico or other contemporary gear that is introduced by the system thread author. What is your point? I read with interest Jfrech's thread about his New Rockport Lyras. I've never heard them, and probably never will. He will describe the sound, probably not post videos, and I will still read with interest. What I will not do is question his choices, complain that they are rare speakers and that there is a bias towards Rockport in his thread.

This thread is also about the type of sound I now hear and have described. It exists as an approach followed by some. You and others are free to pursue other approaches and describe what you are doing.

 

[microstrip]

Aries Cerat, Avantgarde, Odeon (new Carnegie model is amazing), Acapella, Dynamikks Athos (big one not smaller ones). All cheaper than your XLFs (but not cheap) and all work very well with something like the ML3.

Excepting the Avantgarde, none of them can be easily tried with the ML3 locally. Several people strongly advised me against the ML3 / Trio pairing.

 

[PeterA]

I've been sitting on this for awhile unsure if it required being shared publicly or privately.


To be filed under: Collection of outside references to Natural Sound.

Interesting video Rando. I do not see how he accounts for someone hearing a speaker and system for the first time, then four different speakers and systems for the first time, and very quickly concluding that the first, then all four, are all doing something quite different from what he has heard before?

David's speakers were already broken in and my perception of them did not really change during the week that I was there. I am not aware that I was acclimating to the speakers and systems over time. As I listened to a greater variety of music, I did appreciate the speakers more over time and the capabilities of the systems. Is that what he means by the listener getting used to the speakers over time?

I agree that no speaker is perfect and no system is perfect, but we do prefer some to others, sometimes by a large degree. And we often do in fact think some are better than others, not just different.

As far as sounding "natural" or not, everyone has an opinion on that, and again, there are degrees.

 

[bonzo75]

This is not about intelligence, David. There will never be agreement on what constitutes natural sound of a system, and there will always be different understandings of it, see my post. That holds even among people who all have unamplified live music as reference.

Having followed Peter's journey over the last two years, I had initially no problem with his thread title. It seemed natural . Yet I can understand the criticism, which probably would have come upon anyone who had called their system thread "Natural Sound".

you combined intelligence and your theory of relativistic in one post nice

 

[microstrip]

Objective or objection? Either way, Micro, so what? Is that a bad thing? People seem interested. Horns are rare, corner horns rarer, and Vitavox CN-191 rarer still, especially this era. The thread is about a mostly vintage system bought from a dealer who deals in vintage speakers.

In other member system threads, the discussion runs mostly on the new Rockport, Wilson, Magico or other contemporary gear that is introduced by the system thread author. What is your point? I read with interest Jfrech's thread about his New Rockport Lyras. I've never heard them, and probably never will. He will describe the sound, probably not post videos, and I will still read with interest. What I will not do is question his choices, complain that they are rare speakers and that there is a bias towards Rockport in his thread.

This thread is also about the type of sound I now hear and have described. It exists as an approach followed by some. You and others are free to pursue other approaches and describe what you are doing.

My only point is saying the facts. All WBF threads are about our biases and we compare them. You are permanently comparing your current system with your old system and other people systems.

My first post on this line was meant to highlight the value of Al. M comments as he is one of the few people who listened to your system and has a system that means something to me. All else are facts and semantics ...

I can't understand why people in a subjective audio forum are afraid of using the words such as biases and preference. They are inherent to the hobby and can be something positive that helps us enjoying musicm as long as we understand them! We can say that the high-end is mainly a management of listening biases and constraints with the aim of having better sound reproduction.

 

[morricab]

Excepting the Avantgarde, none of them can be easily tried with the ML3 locally. Several people strongly advised me against the ML3 / Trio pairing.

Aries Cerat is in Portugal