The Audio System and High-End Philosophy of Mike Lavigne

[LL21]

A great read as usual, Ron...thank you. Very thought provoking about room, setup and also one of the most detailed comparisons in Mike's system of the 3 amps...which has been a HUGE topic of discussion on the Forum the last several weeks. I will PM you about something related that you mentioned in your posts.

 

[cjfrbw]

Yes, very nice write up, Ron. A hi end write up for a hi end system.

 

[Folsom]

What if the cartridge, in fact, is neutral but the tonearm which carries it or the turntable to which the tonearm is mounted is introducing some kind of anomaly or non-neutrality which impairs or skews what is a truly neutral performance by the cartridge? How would most of us ever know?

Perhaps we audition a system and come away from the audition believing that tube electronics are failing to resolve all of the details in the music. But how do we know it was the tubes causing this? Perhaps the sound of the system was insufficiently detailed because the cables connecting the components are of a copper composition which smoothes out detail or truncates the leading edge of musical transients? Why do we conclude that the tubes are smoothing out the sound when the culprit could be a turntable whose spring suspension is somehow dampening the musical “life” coming out of the tonearm/cartridge assembly?

Perhaps the system sounds overly smooth not because of tubes shaving off detail but because the acoustic treatments in the room are absorbing too much of the energy produced by the system? Perhaps the uneven frequency response of the room is adulterating the performance of every component which in the system? How are we to avoid being adrift in a morass of dueling sonic assumptions and prejudices, and paralyzing nihilism, if we cannot be confident that the most important component in the system -- the room -- is reasonably neutral to begin with?

Uh, we call them measurements, that mythical thing you're wondering about. If we start by knowing what things measure like we can narrow all these questions down to the things we don't know instead of having the biggest open book ever like you're claiming. There are so many things we can't figure out measurements for, why apply philosophy to the things we do know so we can claim we don't know them?

The only artifact I could hear is that the 458 sounds a shade “dry” compared to the 450, and maybe two shades “dry” compared to the ML3.

I was very surprised that the darTZeels do not add to the sound, or exhibit, any edginess or brightness or over-etched artifact like every other solid-state amplifier I have heard. But they do not smooth out anything, either. The 458 is a very impressive actualization of the apocryphal “straight wire with gain.”

-- Solid-state amplifiers invariably have some sonic artifact which makes you aware that you are listening to the sterility of transistors, and not to the liquid naturalness and musicality (whatever we mean by that word in this hobby) of tubes.

Not artifacts. You make a lot of posts about using language well so we can all understand each other, so I'm going to hold you to it, Ron! I think the word you're thinking but not using is attribute.

Only in direct comparison to the darTZeel 458s could I discern that the VAC 450s are not quite as ultimately dynamic or as microscope resolving as the 458s. Only in direct comparison could I hear a very slight smoothing of detail compared to the VACs. The VACs do not exhibit quite the seemingly unlimited dynamic power and speed of the 458s.

I was very surprised that the darTZeels do not add to the sound, or exhibit, any edginess or brightness or over-etched artifact like every other solid-state amplifier I have heard. But they do not smooth out anything, either. The 458 is a very impressive actualization of the apocryphal “straight wire with gain.”

I'm not sure I understand. Did the VAC's not smooth some detail that the 458s did, but then you believe the 458s don't smooth anything? That's how it is written but I suspect that is not what you mean.

Personally I wouldn't make the claim that the 458s smooth nothing, but that depends on definition. They don't cause aberrations that make details go away, but they do nominalize very small volume changes.

CONCLUSION

I learned a great deal from this visit.

Mike is one awesome dude for being so open to have guests hear a truly world class stereo, which means a world class room. It'd be hard not to learn something! It really is amazing how vast the soundstage can sound, it makes the room feel way bigger.

Thank you for the detailed write-up.

 

[Folsom]

I have been reflecting on your writeup this morning and have to admit my audio outlook is a bit soured.

It would appear the lion share of the ability to transparently reproduce music with top-flight gear is based on Mike's very expensive audio-specific room. If these designers are really doing it for such rare spaces in audiophile-land, I can't help but to worry. If the gear is only optimal based on such significant criteria for ownership, where does that leave the audiophile who wants a reference speaker to share music with friends without creating a dedicated man cave. Said another way, if the only way a Clearaudio Goldfinger cartridge doesn't sound bright is a six-figure room, shouldn't we pin some blame on the designer?

I fully realize SOTA is a big investment and one where MikeL has fully achieved it in this hobby, but shouldn't great gear sound good in a variety of rooms and spaces.

It's easier to spend a lot of money and get world class results, than it is to juggle dozens of lower end products to get there. What I mean is you don't have to spend that much money to get that sound (or one you want), but it makes it much easier because the companies specifically cater to the exact circumstance of a large room with particular types of components so they match up pretty well.

Also it's subjective, I am not specifically under the impression you'd like Mike's stereo with any of the amps. Different people like different things. For what Mike likes, he's in the zone.

 

[Sharp 1080]

Thank you both Ron and Mike!

That was a good read. I now have much more insight to Mike's room and his goal to have it be the #1 issue to address first. It makes sense as the better the room acoustics are the changes you make are easily noticed. I enjoy reading about other enthusiasts rooms and equipment. Mike I so want to hear your room now? I have heard Steve's system since he is probably the next closest member geographically to me besides Ron. This hobby is a long term addiction.

Vern

 

[BruceD]

Whew!--- many thanks to Ron for that outstanding "Epistle to the Apostles"! gracious as always in appraisal and writings .

I've followed MikeLs progress and subjective musings since the early days on AAsylum--how his appreciation of the finest aspects of Hi End has not

clouded his humility towards us lesser folk--Kudos and long may he continue to inform and entertain us

BruceD

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Whew!--- many thanks to Ron for that outstanding "Epistle to the Apostles"! gracious as always in appraisal and writings .

I've followed MikeLs progress and subjective musings since the early days on AAsylum--how his appreciation of the finest aspects of Hi End has not

clouded his humility towards us lesser folk--Kudos and long may he continue to inform and entertain us

BruceD

Bruce,

many thanks for the kind words. and i assure you the feelings of respect are mutual since back in those early hifi www AA days.

cheers,

Mike

 

[Mike Lavigne]

That was a good read. I now have much more insight to Mike's room and his goal to have it be the #1 issue to address first. It makes sense as the better the room acoustics are the changes you make are easily noticed. I enjoy reading about other enthusiasts rooms and equipment. Mike I so want to hear your room now? I have heard Steve's system since he is probably the next closest member geographically to me besides Ron. This hobby is a long term addiction.

Vern

Vern,

you would be welcome to visit anytime you venture north. so 'now' works. love to share my version of the glorious hifi-music addiction. just PM me and we can figure it out.

Mike

 

[rockitman]

Thanks Mike for sharing your system for all to see and surmise and thank you Ron for the very detailed write up. Ron...Are you saying the ML3’s fail to deliver with rock and pop on Mike’s system ? That’s a lot of important music in those two genre’s....hmmmm

 

[Mike Lavigne]

earlier in the amplifier thread i had thanked Ron and Tinka for taking the time out of their busy lives to travel to my home and visit Pam and i. it was a great pleasure to enjoy Ron's company and friendship for 2 very focused days.

today I've been at work, and doing lots of commenting on comments regarding Ron's article.

i'm finally home tonight, and before i go any further i want to thank Ron for the wonderful write up and all the very, very kind and generous things he said about my efforts and system. Ron's approach is challenging as it's focused as much about the thinking as about the gear and music. and it does make us all (including me) examine our own approaches and consider what we are doing. and it contains Ron's own views (and honest acknowledgements of his own biases) on his decision processes so it's honest and personal for him. and i think he did a marvelous job of navigating through these various issues and delivered on his intentions.

Bravo Ron, i am humbled and and many thanks buddy!!!

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Thanks Mike for sharing your system for all to see and surmise and thank you Ron for the very detailed write up. Ron...Are you saying the ML3’s fail to deliver with rock and pop on Mike’s system ? That’s a lot of important music in those two genre’s....hmmmm

Ron will no doubt answer.

i'll just say that right now i'm listening to Berstein's 'American In Paris'/Rhapsody in Blue' on a 2xdsd vinyl rip on the ML3's. it's all there. all of it. authority, scale, decay, and space. Saturday night i listened to 5 hours of the ML3's with the local Lamm dealer. one of the last things we listened to was a German pressing of Van the Man's 'Moondance' side 1, and it was fantastic.

yesterday i spent 7-8 hours with the ML3's and listened to a number of solo piano Lp's which were completely involving. lots of fireworks and decay and overtones, and so alive sounding.

it's more about expectations than any obvious issue. listen at modest levels and big music is fine. but those last 2 gears and unlimited volume are not there compared to my darts.

i realize people will focus on this issue, but no one will grasp how it works without hearing the standard the darts set in my system. and that my system is so revealing that amp stress get's noticed. there is no place to hide.

Ron made the Neil Young 'Old Man' comment regarding a bit of limitations because it's a reference cut for me and the Banjo and peak vocals 'soar' and are a tough job for many amplifiers......and when we played that it was one spot where the ML3's could not get it all done and i pointed it out. but that was the exception. and if you heard it in my system that would not be surprising. it's a relatively acoustic cut but that part is very stressful as the recording is very fine and so there is no room for less than full control. if you only had the ML3's you might not realize what should happen there.

Christian, you would have died and went to heaven listening to the Moondance. it was epic. but you might find spots it would stumble where you know your Pass amps have no trouble. but.......if you never had your Pass amps for references you might be blissfully happy.

references and preferences.

I've moved on to the redbook of 'Jack Johnson's, Brushfire Fairytales' and it's very lively, dynamic, meaty, and all there. the fantastic bottom end of the ML3-MM7's is fully engaged. nothing missing. everything perfect.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

and OTOH i'll also share that Saturday night with the Lamm dealer we played the 45rpm of the AP pressing of Miles Davis's 'Seven Steps to Heaven'. and this was so compelling on the ML3's i cannot find words to describe it. what the ML3's do on this track in concert with the extended totally coherent bass from the MM7's is astonishing. Miles's muted horn went to a musical place I've rarely visited and we were under the spell. after the first cut we sat there unable to really process it.

those experiences are so magical it all makes sense. pinch yourself territory. can't quite get all of Neil's banjo? who gives a damn?

when the right music is in the sweet spot of the ML3's it rules the world.

 

[rockitman]

it's more about expectations than any obvious issue. listen at modest levels and big music is fine. but those last 2 gears and unlimited volume are not there compared to my darts.

what are modest listening levels to you ? In general most listening for me is in the 90-100 decibel range although on occasion I go louder. Are the ML3's satisfying at that level of volume with rock and classic pop? I must also take into account your much larger room with more air to move.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

what are modest listening levels to you ? In general most listening for me is in the 90-100 decibel range although on occasion I go louder. Are the ML3's satisfying at that level of volume with rock and classic pop? I must also take into account your much larger room with more air to move.

I have a Radio Shack meter somewhere, i'll try to find it and put a battery in it. I don't have the app on my phone.

if I was guessing, i'd say my longer term personal listening is steady around 80db-85db with 90db to 95db peaks. the room handles volume easily as it breathes.....near field but there is zero glare.

when I have visitors the mean SPL's are a bit higher I think.....

the ML3's do project music into the room so the apparent energy is high for any SPL level.

 

[rockitman]

I have a Radio Shack meter somewhere, i'll try to find it and put a battery in it. I don't have the app on my phone.

if I was guessing, i'd say my longer term personal listening is steady around 80db-85db with 90db to 95db peaks. the room handles volume easily as it breathes.....near field but there is zero glare.

when I have visitors the mean SPL's are a bit higher I think.....

the ML3's do project music into the room so the apparent energy is high for any SPL level.

That’s the way I listen too mostly. When I do the special occasion tape listen, spl’s may go up a bit

 

[NorthStar]

You guys like your music loud.

 

[DaveyF]

I have been reflecting on your writeup this morning and have to admit my audio outlook is a bit soured.

It would appear the lion share of the ability to transparently reproduce music with top-flight gear is based on Mike's very expensive audio-specific room. If these designers are really doing it for such rare spaces in audiophile-land, I can't help but to worry. If the gear is only optimal based on such significant criteria for ownership, where does that leave the audiophile who wants a reference speaker to share music with friends without creating a dedicated man cave. Said another way, if the only way a Clearaudio Goldfinger cartridge doesn't sound bright is a six-figure room, shouldn't we pin some blame on the designer?

I fully realize SOTA is a big investment and one where MikeL has fully achieved it in this hobby, but shouldn't great gear sound good in a variety of rooms and spaces.

Keith, unfortunately in our hobby, the room is the make or break of the system....IME.

I’m sure we have all heard great gear in poor rooms that sounds disappointing...like the many hotel rooms at shows that destroy the Sonics of great systems. We have probably all heard the great room with marginal to poor gear in it, sound a lot better than it has any right to. OTOH, I would suspect that any piece of gear that has to be demoed in only the best rooms to sound good, will be soundly beaten by a piece of gear that sounds good in a marginal room....therefore sounding spectacular in the”right” room.

 

[Folsom]

Keith, unfortunately in our hobby, the room is the make or break of the system....IME.

I’m sure we have all heard great gear in poor rooms that sounds disappointing...like the many hotel rooms at shows that destroy the Sonics of great systems. We have probably all heard the great room with marginal to poor gear in it, sound a lot better than it has any right to. OTOH, I would suspect that any piece of gear that has to be demoed in only the best rooms to sound good, will be soundly beaten by a piece of gear that sounds good in a marginal room....therefore sounding spectacular in the”right” room.

IMO, mostly excuses. The power might be a bigger issue in hotels.

Either way I don't believe a room is required to get most of extremely good sound, but if you want the ultimate complete picture of what you think your stereo should be - like Mike - then you may need that room.

 

[NorthStar]

Ron made the Neil Young 'Old Man' comment regarding a bit of limitations because it's a reference cut for me and the Banjo and peak vocals 'soar' and are a tough job for many amplifiers......and when we played that it was one spot where the ML3's could not get it all done and i pointed it out. but that was the exception. and if you heard it in my system that would not be surprising. it's a relatively acoustic cut but that part is very stressful as the recording is very fine and so there is no room for less than full control. if you only had the ML3's you might not realize what should happen there.

When I've first read Ron's quite elaborate assessment and impressions on everything, I put a special attention on the music selections, to get a better grip of what was happening in real time.

Previously I posted an acoustic live version.
Here's another one, with the full band, and another solo in studio:

That album, that song...I am familiar with, very. It's pop/folk music...simple, not that complex, so I listened to it @ home (not the LP because it's stored in the basement, few copies) from one of my digital compact discs. In the early seventies it had a big impact in my life, my love, my traveling, my music evolution.
That was from the LP of course in the seventies.

The music selections mentioned in reviews from professional audio reviewers are my most solid foundation relating to my better understanding of all the words written, that I can relate closer to the gear and room's acoustics described.

I took that selection, that tune in all simplicity of love, from back in time and to today, almost fifty years later (47) ... Recorded: January–September 1971 (Released: February 1, 1972).

 

[DaveyF]

IMO, mostly excuses. The power might be a bigger issue in hotels.

Either way I don't believe a room is required to get most of extremely good sound, but if you want the ultimate complete picture of what you think your stereo should be - like Mike - then you may need that room.

I am not following you. Have you ever heard a great system in a very poor room sound great...if so, can you imagine how much better that very same system is going to sound in a great room. IME, the room is pretty much everything. Many years ago, my a’phile group did a demo with a pair of Harbeth 40.1’s in a terrible room. Hard reflections everywhere, tons of glass, a very unpleasant reverb in the ceiling and so forth. The system did not sound good at all....so much so, that a few of the attendees thought that maybe the speakers were at fault. That is until they heard the very same speaker in a far superior room, even though this room room was untreated acoustically.
I guess YMMV.