…and since it is in LL line I presume that it might be right along with LL2 Preamp – not particularly interesting preamp. In other words it is most likely the “positively expected” and “might be interesting” continuation of the L1 and L2 line.

As I understand the LL1 is one stage buffer with paralleled output tubes and all this costs $43K.

Again, I do not object the price but I question what is given for the price. 

http://www.lammindustries.com/PRODUCTS/LL1spec.html

http://www.lammindustries.com/PRODUCTS/LL1descr.html

The 17dB gain with Rated Output Voltage of 1V RMS? Am I missing anything?

Anyhow, a conventional PS with regulated filaments (very strange), no phase –switch, just 3 inputs (probably only one is “direct”), capacitor-coupled tube gain stage with 200R output impedance, no remote control, no phonostage… I do not know but I do not see a lot of send in all of it, but I also had a cold shoulder to LL1 ancestor - the LL2.

I hope Lamm is still working on L3 –the next preamp in the L1, L2 line. I hope it will have at least half dozen inputs, no idiotic tape loop, have a few options for RIAA inputs, have phase inversion options and the most important to have the distinctive X-factor impact to sound (unique phase processing) that L1/L2 had. I do not know how LL1 sound as if it employs any X-factor capacity but purely exploiting-wise it did not appear to me like anything that makes sense.  I hope it has transparent enough sound, but under some circumstance a $5 worth op-amp has transparent enough sound… Considering the most of the line-level preamps do not use gain I wonder in which direction the LL1 leads.

Thos manufacturers spray the trims for their models: Reference, Signature, Statement and etc… This one is Signature. I did not hear preamp it but from what I see in description it appears to me that it is a strange Signature…

A site visitor sent me a link to Oneobgyn playback at Audiogone as Oneobgyn uses Lamm LL1.

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr_memb.pl?vaslt&1049587927&memb&zzOneobgyn

Whatever Oneobgyn was expressing at Audiogone about LL1 was not useful but rather diagnosable, not to mention that he acts as a dealer.

Another visitor pointed out that Oneobgyn has own forum, where I just registered and proposed him to express not his typical ecstatic empty idiocy but to express some sings of lucid thinking about LL1. I had a number of specific questions that I was interested and that proposed him to answer.  The guy deleted my post and banned from his site.  I think it was a “huge” lost for me. I guess the real lost was on him as he lost the only opportunity for himself to learn and to understand something about the Lamm LL1 sound.

Yes, it is a bit ridicules to have 4 boxes – a clearly money-raising project. Probably Lamm need to make it 2 chassis init with box #5 is to store manuals and box #6 to store the tube replacements. Talking about tube – one gain state with 4 paralleled Russian 6H30? I an not a huge fun to tube paralleling but Russian tubes that are notoriously difficult to match and to keep matched is shell be truly fun to maintain.

Lamm LL1 at CES 2010

4 parallel tubes with 200R output impedance and 4 inputs. Looks like cathode biased and capacitor coupled. The TKD stepped pots that I would question for best results and circuit board mount.  I do not know …

Looking on the back of the unit I do not truly under what Lamm did with outputs and why he devised into on two section – it a monoblock! So, a unit has 5 outputs, which is OK. For 5 outputs it shall have less then 200R output impedance but I guess it can ran a lot of current from those 200R. What kind people would need multiple out from preamps? Probably the people who run multi-amping, right? Was the ML3 made with objective of multi-amping? Yeh, you wish!

Anyhow, I do not like this preamp and I think it was just Lamm’s collection attempt from the people who uses his L2. If the LL1 has the positive quality of L1/L2 presentation is most like will not be known as a few people I know who owns the LL1 now are idiots and it is not clear how serious will be the future LL1 users. This LL1 vs. L1/L2 preservation of the X-factor that I described before is the only interesting factor to me in LL1. I do not see in LL1 any phase correction element but it might be very settled and not obvious to an ignorant observer.

Anyhow, I think the LL1 is proxy preams while Lamm will make the true needed a statement, preamp. The statement would have optimized stages, wit, on-board phonostage, 6-7 inputs, and sub 50R out impedance…  I wonder who would do it first – Lamm make his next full-function preamp or Guy Hummel would come up with his own RIAA add-in?
The Cat

I did not read it yet.

http://www.theaudiobeat.com/equipment/lamm_ll1_signature.htm

Romy the Cat wrote:

... to show to a thinking reader that the preamp was “reviewed” by an imbecile.  The idiocy of thoughts in the article is too obvious ... The Cat

It is amassing how a guy can so much talk and to say nothing. According him Lamm invented PS and Class A operation…

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/preamplifiers/854-lamm-ll1-signature-stereo-tube-preamplifier.html?showall=1

The review is idiotic but I wonder- why a gay with old BAT VK3 or VK5 was given to review LL1? BAT preamps are so far from Lamms that this JJ is obviously uninformed and not qualified. I would like at least a heavy L2 user to play with LL1….

The entire reviews praise LL1 for low amount of distortion with not feedback. JJ said: “Each one (driving stage) is a low impedance (800 ohms) dual triode, so basically here, you have eight triodes driving the signal.” OK, I wonder how eight triodes can be in driving sit if the unit is balanced. If all 4 tube are paralleled then what drives the other half of balanced circuit? Am I an  idiot or that JJ is an idiot?