To start, I love the Sasha. I think it's midrange and top end is better than the 8 and lightyears ahead of the 6. Down below, I do feel that their puppies are more demanding on amplifiers than the puppies that came before. While 1.2s could rock the older generation WPs, with Sashas you end up with a balance thats great in the mids but soft down below. Think, a 300B SET amp into a mid-nineties sensitivity speaker. It just loses that control whereas a 300B into 105dB sounds very linear.
The M2.2 is the overlooked Lamm. People look at it as the poor boy of the Lamm family perhaps because it is the least expensive even if it is only by a few hundred dollars. Vladimir works with a voicing model. The guy is all measurements or so he claims. I doubt this because I've seen how he listens. He listens more intensely than an owl searching for a mouse. So if you have a Lamm amp and you listen to another you'll know another Lamm amp when you hear one. The differences are not all that great. With the exception of the ML2.x and ML3s which are more liquid, the Ms and the currently discontinued ML1.1s are very, very similar in the midrange on up, differences in punch and low end extension are more speaker dependent.
A shift from stock 1.2 to 2.2 will change the in-room tonal balance. When I use a single pair of 1.2s with my speakers which have their midbass sealed (acoustically suspended). The low end is lacking in energy the way it is with a WP compared to a Sasha only even more pronounced. Balance is akin to a mild dome with the center somewhere at 200Hz or so with my speakers. This is perceived by some as added bloom, while others like myself perceive the same but are unsatisfied because it the looseness is a distraction. It's a pretty, even gorgeous sound but limits what I can listen to. When I switch to a single pair of 2.2s the sound is much more linear, very linear because of the tight gripped control. The immediate reaction would be to assume that they are leaner because looseness and humps do make us think there's more body and if we think there's more body, that's what counts. This is where the tube rolling and my tube recommendations come in. For someone using a 1.2, recommending a Siemens or Telefunken CCa would have 'em running for the door. Using a Mullard ecc88 or e88cc would negate the newly added control. Using Amperex', Valvos (made in the Amperex, Holland factories) and Mil Spec mullards like the CVs (if you can find them) will give you back some of that glow albeit not all of it since you will get more controlled energy down below.
One more thing is that while the M2.2 is class A/AB (the actual reason they are cheaper per watt) you still get more than 40watts into class A. It will be running in Class A for most of your listening. The M2.2 come to think of it is our top seller and given the tiny disparity in price I can tell you that the price is not the reason. I allow home auditions with both amps and buyers with tougher to drive speakers (the majority) pick the 2.2.
Just my experience guys.
The M2.2 is the overlooked Lamm. People look at it as the poor boy of the Lamm family perhaps because it is the least expensive even if it is only by a few hundred dollars. Vladimir works with a voicing model. The guy is all measurements or so he claims. I doubt this because I've seen how he listens. He listens more intensely than an owl searching for a mouse. So if you have a Lamm amp and you listen to another you'll know another Lamm amp when you hear one. The differences are not all that great. With the exception of the ML2.x and ML3s which are more liquid, the Ms and the currently discontinued ML1.1s are very, very similar in the midrange on up, differences in punch and low end extension are more speaker dependent.
A shift from stock 1.2 to 2.2 will change the in-room tonal balance. When I use a single pair of 1.2s with my speakers which have their midbass sealed (acoustically suspended). The low end is lacking in energy the way it is with a WP compared to a Sasha only even more pronounced. Balance is akin to a mild dome with the center somewhere at 200Hz or so with my speakers. This is perceived by some as added bloom, while others like myself perceive the same but are unsatisfied because it the looseness is a distraction. It's a pretty, even gorgeous sound but limits what I can listen to. When I switch to a single pair of 2.2s the sound is much more linear, very linear because of the tight gripped control. The immediate reaction would be to assume that they are leaner because looseness and humps do make us think there's more body and if we think there's more body, that's what counts. This is where the tube rolling and my tube recommendations come in. For someone using a 1.2, recommending a Siemens or Telefunken CCa would have 'em running for the door. Using a Mullard ecc88 or e88cc would negate the newly added control. Using Amperex', Valvos (made in the Amperex, Holland factories) and Mil Spec mullards like the CVs (if you can find them) will give you back some of that glow albeit not all of it since you will get more controlled energy down below.
One more thing is that while the M2.2 is class A/AB (the actual reason they are cheaper per watt) you still get more than 40watts into class A. It will be running in Class A for most of your listening. The M2.2 come to think of it is our top seller and given the tiny disparity in price I can tell you that the price is not the reason. I allow home auditions with both amps and buyers with tougher to drive speakers (the majority) pick the 2.2.
Just my experience guys.
Last edited:
