Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site
In the Forum: Audio News
In the Thread: Lamm Industries: a special interview with a special company
Post Subject: Circular logic versus well-accepted productsPosted by Paul S on: 1/14/2007
Romy, for one thing, you are still talking "best possible sound" in a very literal way while most other people are merely working out one or another acknowledged compromise, or they are hoping to make their system do an even more spectacular rendition of "Casino Royale". Also, you have to know that Lamm knows his own people and hs own "move-up" people, who are mostly guys who buy the expensive LE or pseudo-HE speakers to begin with and who then just dive on the "SET sound" being offered by the ML3. Speaking for myself, I want to warn anyone who cares that even the lower-powered ML2s, as good as they are, are NOT your typical SET in terms of sound. So why expect a more powerful amp from Lamm to be a "typical SET"? I think he used feedback in the ML2 to try to mitigate SET weaknesses with FR speakers, and I'm guessing Lamm will use feedback and/or A2 to "goose" the effective power from the ML3, if only to "distinguish" the ML3 from the ML2.1, to make it appeal to his target audience. Of course 32 watts isn't really much more power than 18 watts in terms of SPL, etc., but i'll be surprised if the ML3 doesn't "sound much more powerful than the ML2.1". The ML2 and 2.1 are said to put out almost 40 watts on "peaks" (whatever that means), and I imagine the ML3s will do similar-but-bigger/better tricks to keep the dogs happily at bay with their BIG bones.
Meanwhile, I have seen but not heard recent efforts by Alex Doyndich (or something like that, SF Bay Area) and others who have implemented multi-channel narrow-band systems for "2-channel" listening, using line-level x-overs. As far as I know, none use the speaker as part of the amp's circuit, which was one narrow-band approach I burned out on fast, many years ago.
While it is true that narrow-band/dedicated-amp is "the way to go" in terms of "the most potential" for dead nuts realism, it is also true that this approach presents its own significant difficulties, the likes of which very few people are either willing or able to deal with at this point in time, for any number of reasons.
As I see it, the irony here is that despite any flaws that Lamms ML3 or even his approach may have, it appears that one or two amps per channel will be the norm for a while yet. Obviously, Lamm is "moving up" on the single-amp-per-channel food chain.
My review is already written! Where does the line form?
Best regards,
Paul SRerurn to Romy the Cat's Site