2. amps-preamps
  3. 1352569145

Fremer lays an Ostrich egg...

From the start, let us say i am a little biased. i read with particular interest the review about the Levinson 53 Amplifiers in the current Stereophile, amps i currently own of course. i also have a Levinson 326S preamp, an EMM Lab CDP, and Von Schweikert VR9SE speakers, all linked up with transparent wire.
my previous amps btw were Levinson 33H mono's which i loved.
According to Mikey, the amps basically suck. no life. no harmonics. uninvolving. flat. they measure great for the most part, except for some anomilies outside of stuff the human ear can detect anyway. they are put together nicely too. But... they have a (dreaded) switch-mode power supply which i get the distinct impression MF decided ahead of time was going to screw up the sound. and so it did (i guess- who really knows what goes on in his head?) so every OTHER sentence in the review emphasizes transparency and dead quiet, neutral sound while the "meat" of the article states the amplifier doesn't have "heart and soul". the Absolute Sound did not reach the same conclusion, but did intimate the amps had an austere quality.
AND THIS is MY review- the ML#53's are not for everybody. they are DEAD NEUTRAL. they are DYNAMIC. DETAILED. my system COOKS when i put on a really good recording of a really good performance. if however the signal lacks in significant areas then I HAVE TO EXTRACT THE MUSIC out of the sound my speakers are making. if i love the performance this is easy for me to do. if i don't care that much about the CD, then it gets sold or just not played that much. other good attributes- the amps never get HOT, they are not impossible to move around (with a little help), they have protection circuitry that kicks in whenever the power goes out. AND FINALLY there is a pair of speakers they won't power up somewhere on the planet. i would like
to see them so i can warn people not to match them up. this could take awhile however.
it floored me when Fremer sold his SF Amati Homage speakers and got Watt Puppy 7's instead. He couldn't say enough good things about the Sonus Fabers, and yet he traded them for a much more analytical sounding speaker, probably for the super-detailed, super focused sound. His reviews of $$,$$$ phono stages are hilarious- what a set of ears he possesses!
when it comes to VPI turntables, he disliked the Aries but LOVED the less-accomplished Scoutmaster. I would guess the Classic-3 is pretty good as well, but i have 0.01% confidence
in M.Fremers' opinion of it. BUT i would welcome anyone ELSE'S professional opinion. At $6,000 it's not an inexpensive investment. add an SDS and a cartridge (and a record cleaning machine) and you're looking at $8500. If in fact VPI (and SO MANY OTHER TURNTABLES) have long engineered an OUTBOARD MOTOR UNIT to isolate noise and enhance the sound, wouldn't you want to know EXACTLY what the deal is with the Classic line? i sure would, and i am a HUGE fan of SOME of VPI's products and i own several.
OTOH, i am a mere peon, peasant, ignorant on the subject of SOTA Analog, and whatever other descripion you might want to label me with. But i think i can say my opinions are consistent and follow a logical pattern.
trying to detect that quality from M.F.'s writings is difficult and at times impossible. and yes, even laughable. i myself have owned (over a long period of time) Levinson, Krell, S. Faber, Pass, and Rowland amplifiers and listened to them in my own home. the ML#53's are very accomplished amps and represent some of the best solid state available, cleaner and faster than the ML-33H's that Stereophile liked so much. Yes they are probably better suited for classical and jazz, and hi-rez recordings are invaluable to bring out the best in them.
but they do not "sound flat and uninvolving". amps don't generally do that anyway- speakers do. Put on a Rachel Podger SACD on Pentatone of Mozart and/or Haydn (or Julia Fisher) and bathe in the warmth of
the sound flowing out of your speakers. Everyone (including ordinary people with ordinary hearing) who have heard my system thinks it sounds "really nice". That's good enough for me. I also think it sounds "really nice".
And i can be pretty picky.
french_fries
goldeneraguy
442 posts
 
To the OP.
I haven't read every post but I ask, would you like your amp more if Fremer praised it or do you like it less because Fremer panned it ?? It really doesn't matter what Mikey thinks (although he is entitled to his opinions and gets paid for them) it's your amp and only your opinion should matter to you.
rok2id's avatar
rok2id
7,859 posts
 
The quandary the OP finds himself in is this: You live by the gurus, you die by the gurus, just like a lot of people in high-end audio. They can't pick and chose. When he said Their $50,000 speakers where great, they belived him. They use his reviews to justify their gear to themselves and others. Now that he says a piece of high-end sucks, they are like deer in the headlights. What do we do now? Does he now have veto power over our purchases? I say, in for a penney, in for a pound. Either you buy into the high-end official line or you don't. Now would seem to be a good time for you to jump ship and go back to common sense. NO AMP on God's green earth is worth $40,000!! Thank Fermer for opening your eyes and move on.
Cheers
rfogel8's avatar
rfogel8
192 posts
 
When it comes to reviewers, my tastes coincide more with tube guys like Dick Olsher or Jack English, when he was around. I've rarely agreed with Mikey's tastes in electronics but wouldn't fault him for what he likes any more than I would someone who prefers SS over tubes; how can that be?

Given the choice between those dufuses at TAS(Harley, Valin, Garcia), or Mikey, I'm of the opinion that Mikey's evaluations are probably closer to the truth than some are willing to admit. Whether I agree with him or not, his reviews of vinyl/analog gear are normally entertaining and quite informative.

For those who criticize Mikey's taste in music, which seems to me, is quite varied, I've attended CES for many years and have often been in rooms where he pops in to hear one of his recordings played on an exhibitors system. Almost always, I and my friends enjoy what we hear and... it's played at a sensible level. I've also been in rooms where Valin or Garcia pop in and it's usually just the opposite. Not only do we often not like the music, but Valin cranks it up so loud that people start scattering like rats on a sinking ship; I'm not exaggerating! I honestly think the guy's going deaf.

As for the M-L review, I've heard enough of that brand to form my own opinion; I've always been underwhelmed so I'm guessing Mikey wasn't too far off the mark.
rockitman's avatar
rockitman
417 posts
 
Well said Grooves. I think you covered it ! Sounds to me the ML's don't stack up to the $50k billing....sigh
whart's avatar
whart
3,033 posts
 
I've been reading hi-fi and record reviews for... a long time. When M. Fremer popped into the thread and claimed that his writing is intended as 'entertainment' (albeit of the 'informed' variety), my first reaction was to say "Hey, wait a minute. You've got a journalistic responsibility to get it right. People hang onto your words, a bad review can kill a product, or make one... how can you take your task so lightly?"
But, after thinking about it for a while.... I think he's right. Here's why:
1. I'm more interested in learning what I can when I read these magazines- a glowing review, using all the magic audiophile words, doesn't really give me much information. I'm more interested in the process by which the reviewer tries to get at what the component does and does not do well than any ultimate and all encompassing conclusion about whether it is an A+ or C- in that reviewer's estimation.
2. All of the subjective evaluations are system dependent to a greater or lesser degree. Yes, you can suss out particular characteristics of a given component by listening to it in a variety of set-ups, but unless that review covers your precise system, in a room of pretty much the exact acoustic character of yours, it's all extrapolation- hints, insights, maybe some questions, but no firm conclusions. I doubt any of us would buy an expensive piece of gear based solely on a professional reviewer's opinion, regardless of how good that review or reviewer is. And of course, that doesn't take into account program material, let alone each listener's own biases (including but not limited to the reviewer himself).
3. Reviews can be voyeuristic to a degree- let's see what he/she (there aren't many 'shes' in this business) says about a component I own. And if you don't own it, it can be fun to read, just for the pleasure of learning a little about the component and one person's experience with it- somebody that knows their way around equipment and knows how to write clearly enough to make it worthwhile to read.
4. There are some bad writers out there, and some shallow reviewers- I don't consider M. Fremer to be one of them. I think he struggles with the process, and I like the fact that he focuses on analog equipment.
Fremer did not pay me to say this. I don't even know the man.
More to discover